UC-NRLF 


75/w 

B/3f 


^yspwB 
HKJH 

IBiH 
HBNP 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

GIF"T  OF" 

..^.O^vvvO Li^MtA^vvo     ....MAA+S**..... 

Q  \- 

Class 


The  Principal  Figures  of  Language 

and  Figures  of  Thought  in  Isaeus 

and  the  Guardianship-Speeches 

of  Demosthenes 


BY 

WILLIAM   WILSON    BADEN,  A.  B. 
Fellow  in  Johns  Hopkins  University 


£x 

or  THF         ^k 
(    UNIVERSITY   I 

OF  / 


A  DISSERTATION  PRESENTED  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR 

OF  PHILOSOPHY  IN   THE  JOHNS   HOPKINS 

UNIVERSITY,  MAY,  1892 


THE  FRIEDENWALD  COMPANY 

BALTIMORE,  MB.,  U.  8.  A. 
IQ06 


THE  PRINCIPAL  FIGURES  OF  LANGUAGE  AND 
FIGURES  OF  THOUGHT  IN  ISAEUS  AND  THE 
GUARDIANSHIP-SPEECHES  OF  DEMOSTHENES. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  object  of  this  study  is  to  make  a  thorough  examination 
of  the  principal  Figures  of  Language  and  Figures  of  Thought 
in  Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes,  and 
see  to  what  extent  the  latter  orator  was  influenced  in  his  use 
of  them  by  the  former.  Three  general  questions  present 
themselves : 

Why  is  Isaeus  worthy  of  study,  what  are  his  relations  with 
Demosthenes,  and  what  is  the  importance  of  Figures  of  Lan- 
guage and  Figures  of  Thought  in  the  development  of  style? 

Isaeus  worthy  of  study. — Isaeus  is  worthy  of  study  because 
he  carries  on  the  tradition  of  practical  oratory,  and  forms  the 
connecting  link  between  Lysias  and  Demosthenes.  He  is  also 
the  highest  and  best  representative  of  Greek  inheritance-law ; 
for  according  to  the  development  of  Greek  art,  the  best  ex- 
ponent of  a  given  art  always  survived.  Thus  it  is  that  the 
excellence  of  Isaeus  in  cases  of  inheritance  wiped  out  nearly 
all  competitive  speeches. 

As  an  individual,  Isaeus  is  comparatively  little  known.  The 
time  and  place  of  his  birth  and  death,  and  even  his  nationality 
are  matters  of  dispute.  All  that  can  be  determined  is  that  he 
flourished  after  the  Peloponnesian  war  and  lived  until  the 
dynasty  of  Philip.1  For  reasons  unknown,  he  took  no  part  in 
the  administration  of  public  affairs,  but  devoted  himself  mainly 
to  the  minute  and  varied  questions  incident  to  the  settlement 
of  estates,  which  had  been  brought  into  a  very  uncertain  con- 
dition by  the  Peloponnesian  war.  For  this  work  he  was  thor- 
oughly qualified  by  his  natural  gifts  and  powers.  But  he  felt 
that  to  deal  successfully  with  intricate  facts,  it  would  be  better 

1Dionysius,  Isae.,  c.  I. 


155338 


4      Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

not  to  follow  the  established  rules  of  rhetoric.  He  did  not, 
however,  withdraw  himself  entirely  from  the  influence  of  his 
predecessors  and  contemporaries.1  But  owing  to  the  number 
of  speeches  lost,  and  the  uncertainty  as  to  the  dates  of  those 
preserved,  the  exact  extent  of  such  influence  cannot  be  deter- 
mined. There  are  some  traces  of  his  connection  with  the  school 
of  Isocrates,  but  the  smooth  and  polished  diction  of  this  school 
was  not  suited  to  forensic  debates  and  arguments.  Isaeus  im- 
presses us  much  more  strongly  as  a  reflector  of  Lysias,  and 
this  is  expressly  stated  by  Dionysius.2  According  to  this  critic,8 
we  find  the  same  purity,  exactness,  persuasiveness,  vividness  in 
the  language  of  Isaeus  and  Lysias.  These  two  orators  would 
have  been  more  similar  in  other  respects,  if  they  had  held  the 
same  views  as  to  the  operation  of  a  speech.  Lysias  depended 
on  his  narratives  to  work  upon  the  feelings  of  his  hearers. 
The  bent  of  Isaeus'  mind  was  towards  argument.  Since  argu- 
ments in  intricate  cases  cannot  be  made  clear  by  simple  state- 
ment, Isaeus  departed  from  the  regular  standards  of  Lysianic 
composition,  and  made  use  of  various  expedients  to  elucidate 
his  points.  He  prepared  the  minds  of  the  judges  by  leading 
them  up  to  the  points  at  issue,  and  did  everything  in  his  power 
to  help  his  own  case  or  to  outwit  his  opponent.  He  was  even 
accused  of  trying  to  deceive  the  judges  themselves. 

Instead  of  following  the  ordinary  scheme  for  the  narrative, 
Isaeus  divided  it  into  heads,  and  placed  the  proper  documents, 
proofs,  arguments,  etc.,  under  each  head.  He  may  have  re- 
ceived the  general  idea  of  this  from  Isocrates. 

At  times  Isaeus  made  preparatory  statements  and  anticipated 
what  was  to  follow.  As  Sir  William  Jones,  following  Diony- 
sius,  well  says,  "  his  anticipations,  recapitulations,  digressions, 
inversions,  variations,  transitions,  were  happily  and  season- 
ably applied  in  conformity  with  the  disposition  of  his  judges 
and  the  nature  of  each  particular  case." 

Although  such  expedients  rendered  Isaeus  inferior  to  Lysias 
in  natural  charm  and  grace,  they  made  his  style  much  more 
elaborate  and  varied,  and  his  arrangement  far  more  effective. 
But  they  gave  him  a  reputation  for  trickery  and  deception,  and 
.,  Isae.,  c.  i.  2Dionys.,  Isae.,  c.  2.  3Isae.,  c.  3. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes      5 

deprived  him  of  the  attributes  of  simplicity  and  truthfulness, 
which  had  been  assigned  to  Lysias  and  Isocrates. 

Relations  between  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes. — It  was  gener- 
ally believed  by  the  ancients  that  Isaeus  was  a  teacher  of 
Demosthenes.  The  earliest-known  authority  for  this  is  Her- 
mippus,  mentioned  by  Dionysius  and  Harpocratio  (7<raTos). 
Compare  Hvos  'Iffaiou.  Hermippus  was  probably  used  as  an 
authority  by  Plutarch,  Pseudo-Plutarch,  and  the  author  of 
Ai)fioff0evi)<;,  d,  (Suidas).1  He  was,  doubtless,  known  to  the 
other  writers,  also,  from  the  works  of  Dionysius.  According 
to  Dionysius,  Hermippus  said  nothing  about  Isaeus,  except 
that  he  was  a  pupil  of  Isocrates  and  a  teacher  of  Demosthenes, 
and  was  on  familiar  terms  with  the  best  philosophers.  As  to 
when,  how  long,  or  for  what  pay,  Isaeus  is  supposed  to  have 
taught  Demosthenes,  he  is  silent.  Next  to  Hermippus,  the  best 
authorities  for  the  matters  stated  about  Isaeus  are  ( I )  Pseudo- 
Plutarch,  Lives  of  the  Ten  Orators;  (a)  Life  of  Isaeus,  p. 
839  E;  (b)  Life  of  Demosthenes,  p.  844;  (2)  Libanius,  Life  of 
Demos.,  pp.  3,  51.  (see  also  argument  to  Demos.,  XXXI)  ;  and 
(3)  Suidas,  'Iffaws.  The  accounts  of  Zosimus,  Life  of  Demos- 
thenes, p.  153,  R.,  and  Photius  are  secondary,  being  founded 
chiefly  on  Hermippus  and  Pseudo-Plutarch.  It  is  impossible  to 
determine  where  Hermippus,  Pseudo-Plutarch,  Libanius,  and 
Suidas  obtained  their  information,  but  it  probably  came  from 
some  of  the  numerous  lives  of  the  orators  that  have  been  lost. 

We  must  assume  a  personal  relation,  if  we  believe  Pseudo- 
Plutarch,  who  says  that  Demosthenes  upon  attaining  his  major- 
ity paid  Isaeus  ten  thousand  drachmas  to  abandon  his  school, 
and  that  he  had  Isaeus  as  a  teacher  in  his  house  for  four  years. 
Such  a  relation  is  also  assumed  by  Suidas,  who  adds,  however, 
that  Isaeus  taught  Demosthenes  for  nothing.  The  account  of 
Libanius  gives  three  possibilities :  ( I )  The  speeches  were  com- 
posed entirely  by  Isaeus;  (2)  Isaeus  helped  Demosthenes  in 
their  composition  ;  (3)  Demosthenes  imitated  Isaeus.  The  first 
two  possibilities  assume  a  personal  relation.  The  mere  fact 
that  the  ancients  said  that  Demosthenes  was  a  pupil  of  Isaeus, 
cannot  be  taken  as  proof.  They  were  so  impressed  by  the 
actual  existence  of  such  a  relation  between  certain  well-known 

1  See  Schaefer,  Philologus,  VI,  427. 


6      Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

men,  as  Anaxagoras  and  Pericles,  Socrates  and  Plato,  that  they 
often  created  such  a  relation  without  sufficient  proof.  It  can- 
not be  positively  asserted  that  Demosthenes  was  a  personal 
pupil  of  Isaeus,  and  it  is  not  necessary  to  assume  it.  The  tie 
may  have  simply  been  that  which  attracts  and  binds  together 
kindred  minds.  A  man  who  attained  to  such  heights  in  his 
career  as  Demosthenes,  could  not  have  failed  to  study  the  writ- 
ings of  the  celebrated  men  of  his  own  and  preceding  ages. 
Hence  he  must  have  been  acquainted  with  the  work  of  both 
Isocrates  and  Isaeus.  Much  in  Isocrates  was  intended  to 
gratify  the  pleasures  and  fancies  of  others ;  the  speeches  of 
Isaeus  were  composed  for  the  actual  use  of  persons  who  had 
to  plead  in  court.  Demosthenes  undoubtedly  felt  that  in  force 
and  versatility  of  argument,  Isaeus  was  far  superior  to  Iso- 
crates, and  that  success  against  his  guardians  could  be  better 
ensured  by  imitating  the  energetic  and  subtle  methods  of 
Isaeus.  In  all  probability,  Demosthenes  had  heard  in  court 
speeches,  composed  by  Isaeus,  and  had  read,  studied,  and 
committed  others.  He  may  in  this  way  have  learned  to  use 
Isaeus  as  a  pattern  and  to  imitate  his  style  of  oratory. 

Dionysius  has  tried  to  establish  the  similarities  and  imita- 
tions. According  to  him,  Isaeus  is  the  source  of  the  oratorical 
perfection  of  Demosthenes  and  his  masterly  employment  of 
style.  Dionysius  makes  specially  prominent,  as  the  main 
characteristics  in.  Isaeus'  style,  the  arrangement,  division,  and 
handling  of  material,  that  is,  the  structure  of  the  speech.  In 
this  he  *  says  that  Demosthenes  is  the  imitator  of  Isaeus. 

That  Demosthenes  did  not  follow  Isaeus  in  a  slavish  manner, 
is  proved  by  a  larger  preponderance  of  the  epideictic  element, 
by  a  stricter  avoidance  of  hiatus,  and  by  the  passion  and 
pathos  of  his  epilogues.  But  at  no  time  did  Demosthenes 
venture  to  dispense  with  a  proem,  nor  did  he  quote  law  so  fre- 
quently as  Isaeus.  In  his  early  speeches,  Demosthenes  shows 
traces  of  the  influence  of  both  Isocrates  and  Isaeus.  But  as 
his  natural  temperament  was  more  in  harmony  with  that  of 
Isaeus,  during  his  entire  development  he  followed  the  types 
set  by  the  latter,  while  the  influence  of  Isocrates  served  to 

1  Isae.,  c.  14. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes      7 

ornament  and  perfect  these  types.  Hence  it  may  be  said  that 
both  to  the  artistic  expression  of  Isocrates  and  to  the  new  and 
sharper  weapons  furnished  by  Isaeus,  we  owe  the  consummate 
art  of  Demosthenes. 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  FIGURES  OF  LANGUAGE  AND  FIGURES  OF 

THOUGHT. 

The  difference  between  them  is  defined  by  Alexander,1  III, 
10.  Compare  Tiberius,  III,  69.  For  a  more  general  discussion, 
see  Alexander,  III,  n,  27;  Phoebammon,  III,  44;  Tiberius, 
III,  59.  Figures  of  Language,  according  to  the  above  defini- 
tions, depend  upon  the  form  and  arrangement  of  the  words. 
Figures  of  Thought  preserve  their  identity,  no  matter  what  the 
position  of  the  words  may  be.  As  the  tendency  of  the  figures 
of  thought  and  the  more  lively  figures  of  language  was  to  give 
animation  to  the  style,  with  the  exception  of  Andocides  they 
were  rarely  used  by  the  earlier  orators,  who  preferred  a  more 
sober  and  measured  delivery.  But  Isaeus,  guided  by  the  prac- 
tical necessities  of  the  courts,  infused  new  life  and  vigor  into 
his  speeches  by  a  freer  use  of  these  more  agonistic  and  passion- 
ate figures,  which  were  probably  borrowed  from  the  language 
of  the  people. 

DionySlUS  says  of  Isaeus  (C.  3.)  :  ff^fidrtav  re  p.sra^oXal^  iva- 
fwviiov  xdl  -xaOyTtxatv  TiouiXXsi  rouq  J.6you<;.  (c.  12)  xard  rijv 
xotvorrjra  T&V  ff%7)fidTa>v  ouroffi  TtoixiXwrepoe;.  But  IsaeUS  also 

ornamented  and  embellished  his  style  with  the  figures  found 
in  the  older  and  more  stately  eloquence.  A  knowledge  of  the 
use  of  these  figures  is  important,  because  they  form  a  good 
index  to  the  style  of  the  different  orators.  The  figures  will  be 
discussed  under  the  following  heads :  I.  Figures  of  Language : 
A.  Figures  of  Language  that  do  not  occur  at  all,  or  more  rarely, 
in  the  earlier  orators  ;  B.  Gorgianic  Figures. 

II.  Figures  of  Thought:  A.  Questions;  B.  Figures  of 
Thought  found  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in  Isocrates ;  C. 
Figures  of  Thought  not  used  by  Isocrates ;  D.  Summary. 

1  The  references  are  to  the  volumes  and  pages  of  Spengel,  Rhetores 
Graeci,  Vols.  MIL 


8      Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

I. 

FIGURES  OF  LANGUAGE. 
A. 

Figures  of  Language  that  do  not  occur  at  all,  or  more  rarely 
in  the  earlier  orators:  Anadiplosis,  Anastrophe,  Anaphora, 
Asyndeton.  A  few  less  important  figures  are  discussed  under 
this  head,  viz.:  Antistrophe,  Symploke,  Diple  Epanaphora, 
Polysyndeton. 

A  nadiplosis — Epanalepsis. 

Anadiplosis  is  defined  by  Phoebammon,  III,  46.  Cf.  Zon., 
Ill,  165 ;  Anon.,  Ill,  182.  The  definition  of  Epanalepsis  as 
given  by  Alexander,  III,  19,  agrees  with  that  of  Anadiplosis: 

orav      xard      rctetous      yuivaq      ^TTfAa/jt/Jdvo/xei/.         Cf.  Tryphon,  III, 

203  ;  Georg.,  Ill,  252.  Phoebammon's  definition  of  epanalepsis, 
III,  46,  seems  to  require  the  words  repeated,  to  be  in  different 
cola.  See  Zon.,  Ill,  164;  Anon.,  Ill,  181.  For  the  purposes 
of  this  investigation,  the  rhetorical  effect  of  anadiplosis  and 
epanalepsis,  as  defined  by  Alex.,  Ill,  19,  will  be  discussed, 
and  illustrations  given.  According  to  the  definitions,  anadi- 
plosis or  epanalepsis  consists  in  the  repetition  of  words  with 
a  similar  meaning  and  application.  The  words  repeated  may 
follow  one  another,  or  be  separated  by  less  emphatic  words 
which  tend  to  enhance  their  force.1  In  Homer  the  repetition  of 
one  word  after  another  is  mere  accumulation,  and  serves  to 
chain  the  attention  of  the  hearer.  In  later  Greek,  it  may  be 
rhetorical  and  picturesque,  or  may  represent  intense,  excited, 
or  passionate  action.  Cf.  Georg.,  Ill,  252 ;  Apsines  I,  358. 
Cornificius,  IV,  28,  38 :  vehementer  commovet  eiusdem  redinte- 
gratio  verbi.  Anadiplosis  is  not  employed  by  an  author  of 
reserve  like  Lysias,  nor  is  it  suited  to  the  epideictic  style  of 
Isocrates.  The  figure  is  found  in  the  practical  orator,  Isaeus, 
but  from  the  liveliness  and  energy  of  his  style,  we  might  expect 
a  more  extensive  use.  With  him  it  is  confined  entirely  to  the 
negative.  Of  the  five  examples,  three  repeat  the  negative  after 
the  intervention  of  a  dependent  clause,  to  lay  greater  stress  on 
the  facts  stated  in  the  clause:  6,  40,  44;  10,  12 

xBlass,  Demos.,  147. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes      9 

Demosthenes     repeats     ravryv     after     a     relative     clause     in 

28,  ii.      Isaeus    has    two    cases    of    emphatic    repetition 
after    the    oath,  p.a  Jt'a,   both    in    the    same    paragraph,    n, 
35.     The  repetition  of  the  negative  after  the  intervention  of 
less  emphatic  words,  is  found  in  Demosthenes  27,  43,  and 
30,  n.     But  even  in  his  earliest  speeches,  Demosthenes  goes  far 
beyond  Isaeus  in  the  use  of  anadiplosis;  for  nowhere  in  the 
latter  orator  do  we  find  so  passionate  an  appeal  as  in  the 
epilogue  of  the  deuterology,  28,  20.    Isaeus  is  far  less  passionate 
in  what  may  be  considered  the  corresponding  passage,  8,  45. 

The  earnest  convictions  of  Demosthenes 1  are  shown  even  in 
his  youth  by  the  occurrence  of  his  favorite  form  of  redupli- 
cation, oux  sffrt  raDra,  after  a  series  of  questions  in  27,  57 ; 

29,  49. 

The  formula  is  frequent  in  the  De  Corona.  The  difference 
between  the  two  orators  may  be  seen  by  comparing  Isaeus, 
10,  17. 

Anastrophe. — This  figure  consists  in  the  repetition  of  the 
final  word  of  one  clause  at  the  beginning  of  the  next. 
Cf.  Anon.,  Ill,  133.  Such  repetition  lends  beauty  to  the  speech, 
according  to  Tiberius,  III,  70.  Anastrophe,  like  anadiplosis, 
occurs  in  Homer  and  the  tragic  poets,  but  is  not  found  in 
the  early  orators.2  There  are  but  few  cases  of  anastrophe  in 
Isaeus  and  Demosthenes,  and  these  may  serve  as  a  smooth 
transition  to  what  follows,  the  words  repeated  being  emphasized 
by  chiastic  arrangement :  Isae.,  3,  36,  42 ;  6,  31 ;  8,  32. 

Demosthenes  comes  nearest  to  the  figure  in  28,  17 ;  29,  21,  31. 

Anaphora  or  Epanaphora. 

Defined  by  Alexander,  III,  2O:     orav  O.TTO  TOO  auroo    dvoparoq 

duo  1)  Tthia)  xwXa  apzyrat.  Nothing  essential  is  added  by  the  other 
rhetoricians.  Such  a  repetition  at  the  beginning  of  several 
consecutive  sentences  or  members  of  a  sentence,  takes  place 
when  the  force  is  concentrated  in  one  word,  which,  by  reason 

*As  Euripides  among  the  tragedians,  so  Demosthenes  among  the 
orators,  employs  as  a  favorite  device  of  iratioc  the  repetition  of  a 
word  or  phrase.  Aeschines  practically  does  not  employ  it  at  all. 
Sihler,  Trans.  Amer.  Phil.  Ass.,  XVI,  128. 

'Antiphon  comes  very  close  to  the  figure  in  V,  93. 


io    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

of  its  importance,  occupies  the  first  place.  This  parallel  posi- 
tion of  the  words  relieves  the  hearer  of  the  necessity  of  directing 
his  attention  to  the  construction  of  the  second  sentence,  which 
has  already  been  indicated  in  the  first.  The  sensations  which 
are  thus  aroused  and  renewed  again  in  the  same  order,  remain 
deeply  imbedded  in  the  mind,  because  they  come  without 
exertion  (Rehdantz-Blass,  p.  6).  The  effect  of  this  is  some- 
times to  add  charm  and  grace  to  the  speech,1  sometimes  vigor 
and  emphasis  combined  with  pathos.2  Anaphora,  like  the  two 
preceding  figures,  is  found  in  Homer  and  the  tragic  poets,  and 
also  to  a  limited  extent  in  Antiphon  and  Andocides  in  free 
rather  than  artistic  passages.  It  does  not  occur  at  all  in  the 
polished  prose  of  Isocrates  apart  from  the  common  formulae, 
TOTS  fi.lv  .  .  .  TOTS  S£}  7r0/Ua  fi£v  .  .  .  7r0/Ud  <5£,  etc.  This  absence 
of  the  figure  from  Isocrates  indicates  that  it  belongs  rather 
to  the  sphere  of  every-day  language.  The  first  author  to  use 
anaphora  to  any  considerable  extent  is  Lysias,  who  so  wrote 
his  speeches  that  the  thoughts  and  language  corresponded 
with  the  character  of  the  speakers,  usually  members  of  the 
plainer  classes.  Because  of  his  fondness  for  antithesis,  parallel- 
isms, etc.,  Lysias  frequently  used  the  tt£v  . . .  dl  balance  in  form- 
ing anaphora.  This  is  probably  borrowed  from  the  Sicilian 
rhetoric.3  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes  are  considerably  behind 
Lysias  in  the  use  of  anaphora  except  when  formed  by  pre- 
positions and  conjunctions,  but  they  have  about  the  same  pro- 
portion as  Antiphon  and  Andocides.  There  are  four  cases  of 
anaphora  in  Isaeus  with  words  other  than  prepositions  and 
conjunctions,  all  with  the  nlv .  .  .  dl  balance,  which  adds  a 
logical  element  combined  with  emphasis:  5,  20;  6,  43;  n,  9, 

io ;  5,  9>  ^-te 

There  are  three  such  instances  in  Demosthenes,  all  in  the 
speeches  modeled  most  closely  after  Isaeus ;  27,  19,  30;  28,  18. 

Repeated  pronouns. — Isaeus  frequently  uses  anaphora  with 
pronominal  forms  which  contain  within  them  the  kernel  of  the 
sentence.  Such  pronominal  anaphoras,  especially  when  *«rd 
xofjifjiaTa,  gives  great  strength  and  animation  to  the  speech,  and 
form  one  of  the  marks  of  the  practical  orator :  3,  io,  60 ;  5,  io, 

1  Hermogenes,  II,  335.  a  Tiberius,  III,  73 ;  Hermog.,  I.  c. 

8  Frohberger,  Lys.  Prol.  12,  note  84. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     1 1 

15,  17,  21,  25,  cf.  g,  10 ;  6,  25,  53  ;  7,  28,  40 ;  8,  14,  18 ;  u,  33,  35. 
This  kind  of  anaphora  is  also  found  in  Demosthenes  but  not 
to  the  same  extent:   27,  12,  35,  38;  29,  32;  30,  28,  30.     Anti- 
thetic sentences  with  anaphora  are  frequent  in  both  Isaeus  and 
Demosthenes.     The  antithesis  is  further  heightened  by  plv.  .  . 
9li      Isaeus,  i,  39;  3,  47>  75  J  5,  15.  17,  25,  32;  6,  52,  53,  58; 
7,  n,  33;  8,  6,  12,  20,  29;  9,  12;  n,  21,  33,  50:  Demosthenes, 
27,  22,  35,  55 ;  28,  17 ;  29,  4,  14 ;  30,  28,  38 ;  31,  7. 

Anaphora  and  asyndeton. — Great  strength  and  animation  are 
produced  by  asyndetic  commata  combined  with  anaphora.  Only 
a  few  cases  are  found :  Isaeus,  8,  24,  29 ;  n,  6 ;  Demos.,  31,  14. 
Anaphora  with  particles  is  frequent  in  both  orators. 

Diple  epanaphora. — Defined  by  Zonaeus,  III,  165.  Several 
examples  in  Isaeus :  8,  14,  20,  28. 

Antistrophe. 

Both  antistrophe  and  anaphora  occur  in  two  or  more  sym- 
metrically formed  sentences,  or  members  of  a  sentence,  which 
have  some  point  in  common.  This  common  point  in  anaphora 
is  placed  at  the  beginning,  in  antistrophe  at  the  end  of  the 
sentences.  Antistrophe  is  defined  by  Alex.,  Ill,  29.  In  artistic 
composition  the  figure  is  productive  of  beauty.  Cf.  Hermog., 
II,  335.  If  the  clauses  are  short,  the  repeated  words  give 
energy  and  vivacity  to  the  discourse.1  In  Isaeus  and  the  orators 
that  precede  him  with  the  possible  exception  of  Lysias,  anti- 
strophe  occurs  more  frequently  than  anaphora.  But  this  is  due 
to  emphasis  or  natural  position  rather  than  to  a  desire  for 
artistic  effect.  Isaeus,  3,  26,  (52),  55,  68;  4,  5;  5,  n,  12;  6, 

16,  58 ;  8,  i,  35 ;  9,  36 ;  10,  4,  23 ;  n,  6,  n :   only  two  cases  in 
Demos.,  27,  37,  55. 

Symploke. — Defined  by  Alexander,  III,  30,  as  being  a  com- 
bination of  anaphora  and  antistrophe.  Thus  symploke,  by 
combining  the  effect  of  the  two  figures,  brings  into  prominence 
both  ends  of  the  clauses.  Isaeus,  4,  26 ;  5,  15,  25  ;  6,  53 ;  10,  7. 
Symploke  does  not  occur  in  Demosthenes.  This  is  to  be  ex- 
pected owing  to  the  few  cases  of  antistrophe. 

1  Hermogenes,  II,  366;  cf.  Demetrius,  III,  319. 


12    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

Asyndeton. 

Asyndeton  is  defined  by  Phoebammon,  III,  45  :  napa 
ol  ffovdiovreq  ffwdeff^ot.  On  its  effect,  see  Alex.,  Ill,  32. 
Asyndeton  is  one  of  the  two  figures  of  evdeta.  It  is  also 
called  dtdtuffcs,  cf.  Alex.,  Ill,  32.  Asyndeton,  on  the  one  hand, 
is  used  in  quiet,  every-day  discourse;  on  the  other,  it  im- 
parts great  rapidity  and  vivacity  to  the  style  when  there  is 
no  time  or  leisure  for  combining  with  conjunctions.1  It  thus 
serves  to  shut  off  the  subject  and  hurry  the  narrative;  for  it 
presents  an  appearance  of  saying  several  things  in  the  time 
which  would  otherwise  be  required  to  say  one.  Cf.  Aristotle, 
I,  146.  Hence  the  main  effect  is  enumeration  and  accumulation 
—  pfyeOos  xai  ittfOos,  Hermog.,  II,  435.  There  is  no  striking 
instance  of  asyndeton  in  Antiphon  except  in  the  sixth  speech, 
which  so  closely  resembles  practical  oratory.  It  is  frequent  in 
the  natural  orator,  Andocides.  Lysias  has  but  three2  and 
Isocrates,8  five  cases  of  asyndeton.  Isaeus  shows  a  marked  ad- 
vance over  the  orators  that  preceded  him,  and  uses  the  figure 
with  great  force. 

He  employs  it  in  narrative  when  he  wishes  to  give  a  rapid 
description,  enumeration,  or  summary,  or  to  introduce  some 
new  matter.  With  participles:  8,  7,  29;  2,  14:  with  finite 
verbs  :*  8,  24  ;  (  short  rapid  sentences  put  in  the  mouth  of  the 
opponent)  ;  11,  5,  a  forcible  e/ey/oc  after  the  reading  of  a  law. 
The  speaker  does  not  give  the  other  party  time  to  catch  his 
breath.  In  n,  6,  we  have  an  excellent  example  of  climax,  in 
which  the  delinquencies  of  the  defendant  are  rapidly  and 
ironically  detailed  by  the  asyndetic  aorists.  The  last  three 
sentences  are  asyndeta,  xard  xofifiara,  in  reference  to  which 
Tiberius,  III,  78,  remarks:  raora  detvwfftv  £%£t  xai  ivfyyetav. 

Cf.  Rehdantz,  Phil.,  IX,  68.  There  is  a  rapid  summary  of  a 
law  in  6,  9.  Asyndeton,  xard  foopa,  in  narrative  produces  rap- 
idity and  ntfOos.  Cf.  Tib.,  Ill,  77.  See  Isaeus,  8,  34  ;  n,  41,  43. 


1  Prof.  Gildersleeve's  lectures. 

3  Berbig,  Genus  Tenue  Dicendi,  XVI,  cites  four  examples  for  Lysias, 
but  it  is  wrong  to  count  III,  46,  as  both  a  relative  pronoun  and  its  ante- 
cedent, the  demonstrative,  prevent  asyndeton. 

'Gelehrt,  p.  38.     Blass,  Isoc.,  167. 

4  The  cut  and  thrust  of  the  finite  verb  in  asyndeton  produces  a  certain 
tumult,  Prof.  Gildersleeve. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     13 


Asyndeton  2£  anoffraffsioq.  Defined  by  Anon.,  Ill,  125  :  r« 
affuvdtrws  elffayo/jisva.  The  figure  lends  brilliancy  and  liveliness 
to  the  diction  :*  Isaeus,  I,  36  ;  4,  22,  24. 

According  to  Aristotle,  the  place  of  asyndeton  is  in  the  epil- 
ogue ;  for  it  is  one  of  the  chief  constituents  of  "  what  in 
Greek  might  be  called  TO  ivaycbvtov  and  in  English  might  be 
paraphrased  as  the  art  of  grappling."  It  is  hard  to  find  a 
better  example  of  this  grappling  style  than  the  asyndeton  in 
6,  62,  65.  There  is  a  sudden  breaking  off  from  what  precedes 
m  9»  35  >  an  earnest  appeal  for  a  favorable  decision  in  9,  37. 
In  7,  41,  the  asyndeton  iS  dxoffTdffzws,  together  with  the 
asyndeton  in  parallel  sentences,  mars  the  purity  of  the  epideic- 
tic  style.2  But  in  none  of  his  speeches  does  Isaeus  display 
such  passion  and  pathos  as  Demosthenes  in  the  epilogue 
of  the  twenty-eighth  speech.  In  this  passionate  appeal  Demos- 
thenes forsook  all  the  traditions  of  the  past,  and  allowed  his 
feelings  and  sense  of  injustice  to  direct  him,  thus  giving  a 
clear  intimation  of  the  great  oratorical  powers  that  lay  within 
him.  In  this  speech  he  uses  numerous  commatic  asyndeta 
together  with  asyndeta  ££  dxoffrdffews  .  See  §  20,  in  which  the 
use  of  two  finite  verbs  with  asyndeton  instead  of  converting 
one  of  the  verbs  into  a  participle,  is  specially  effective.  There 
are  only  two  asyndeta  in  what  may  be  considered  the  corres- 
ponding passage  in  Isaeus,  8,  45,  but  they  produce  a  sharp, 
incisive  climax.  Cf.  Demos.,  28,  23.  Asyndeton  IS  dnoffTd- 
<rews  is  seen  in  Demos.,  28,  19,  22. 

In  Demos.,  29,  55-57,  the  points  of  the  argument  are  sum- 
marized in  a  long  series  of  asyndetic  clauses,  dvaxsyakaitoffiq. 
Such  summaries  are  frequent  in  the  best  period  of  the  orator. 
In  Isae.,  8,  29,  the  clauses  are  shorter  and  have  a  keener  thrust. 

The  recapitulation  in  Demos.,  27,  48,  has  only  one  asyndeton. 
Upon  the  whole,  Isaeus  had  little  influence  on  the  younger 
Demosthenes  in  the  matter  of  asyndeton.  This  is  doubtless 
due  to  the  early  epideictic  tendency  of  Demosthenes  ;  for  with 
the  exception  of  the  passionate  epilogue  in  the  twenty-eighth 
speech  and  the  summary  in  the  epilogue  of  the  twenty-ninth, 
there  are  few  important  cases  of  asyndeton  in  the  guardianship- 
speeches.  In  27,  48,  we  find  a  single  asyndetic  clause  to  sum 

^ee  Frei,  Rh.  Mus.,  VII,  542.  2Blass,  Isaeus,  480,  482. 


14    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

up,  as  it  were,  after  a  series  of  copulative  clauses.  In  29,  41, 
is  a  quick  command  after  a  question.  The  Onetor  speeches 
furnish  one  forcible  example :  31,  8. 

Miscellaneous  Instances  of  Asyndeton. 

Asyndeton  with  ^i/1. — Isaeus,  5,  3;  9,  19;  7,  22;  Demos., 
27,63528,  12529,9. 

In  short  antithetic  clauses,  the  emphasis  which  lies  in 
<>v  or  u-TJ,  often  takes  the  place  of  the  connecting  particle. 
Reh.,  p.  10 :  Isaeus,  i,  45;  5,  38;  8,  21,  31 ;  10,  21,  24;  n,  25, 
49 :  Demos.,  28,  7 ;  29,  14,  49 ;  30,  16 ;  31,  8,  13.  A  mild  asyn- 
deton, ££  axo-  occurs  after  the  epilogue  in  Isae.,  7,  45,  and 
8,  46,  the  same  words  in  each  case :  ovx  o13a  art  fle?  icAeiat  Afystv, 
It  is  a  common  formula  and  is  found  in  Isocrates,  but  not 
in  these  early  speeches  of  Demosthenes.  The  speech  is  re- 
sumed with  asyndeton  in  Isae.,  n,  6,  after  a  dramatic  passage. 
In  the  excitement  there  is  no  time  for  connecting  particles. 
Asyn.  occurs  in  n,  12,' after  the  reading  of  a  law. 

The  order  to  read  a  law,  take  the  stand,  etc.,  is  introduced 
asyndetically  in  both  orators. 

Polysyndeton. 

Polysyndeton,  the  opposite  of  asyndeton,  by  the  accumulation 
of  particles,  gives  more  deliberateness  and  impressiveness, 
more  judicial  weight  and  dignity  to  the  speech.  Like  the 
imperfect  tense,  it  dwells  on  the  particulars,  or  gives  the  details 
of  an  enumeration,  while  asyndeton,  like  the  aorist,  gives  the 
outlines.  Polysyndeton  frequently  imparts  a  special  ease  and 
grace  to  diction,  and  hence  is  well  suited  both  to  a  plain  and 
solemn  speaker.  It  is  found  in  poetry  and  the  natural  speech.3 
All  the  orators  employ  polysyndeton  with  about  the  same  range 
of  conjunctions. 

The  following  are  the  occurrences  in  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes, 
arranged  according  to  the  conjunctions:  With  nouns:  xcu 
(five  times),  Isae.,  7,  36;  8,  32;  (four  times),  Isae.,  6,  10;  10, 
4;  u,  8,  12;  12,  8:  Demos.,  27,  10:  (three  times),  Isae.,  i, 
26,  35,  39  i  3,  22 ;  4,  31 ;  5,  10,  35  ;  6,  21,  29 ;  7,  16,  35  ;  8,  35,  46 : 

1  See  Frohberger,  Appendix  to  Lysias,  XII,  48. 
3  Prof.  Gildersleeve's  Lectures. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     15 

Demos.,  28,  4,  8,  20;  29,  35  ;  30,  9:  re.  x«{.  *«<',  Isae.,  2,  17,  45 ; 
3,  6;  4,  i;  6,  16;  10,  15:  Demos.,  27,  7,  32,  60:  p.lv.  dl.  W, 
Isae.,  5,  5;  7,  9;  n,  42:  Demos.,  27,  4,  9,  n,  35;  28,  30;  29, 

7,   23 :    oure.    oure.    oure,    Isae.,   4,    l8 :    pyre,    pajre.    pujre,     Isae., 

6,  39:    Demos.,  29,  24:    }'.   }'.  ijf.  }'.  }',  Isae.,  n,  5:  7.  7.   v 
Demos.,     29,     22,     32:      With     verbal     forms:    xat    (five 
times),    Isae.,    8,    16:    Demos.,    30,    18:    xat    (four    times), 
Isae.,    3,    51;    9,    27;    n,    7;    Demos.,    29,    3,    36;    30,    39; 
xai    (three  times),  Isae.,  i,  7;  2,  42;  4,  27;  6,   I,  4,  27,  62; 

7,  32,  42;  8,  9;  9,4:    Demos..,  28,  3;  29,  30;  30,  4,   35; 

31,  14:  re.  xa:'.  xa:',  Isae.,  2,  36:  Demos.,  27,  60:  re.  re.  re, 
Isae.,  6,  36:  re.  re.  re.  re,  Demos.,  27,  l6:  owre.  owrs.  oure, 

Isae.,  3,  47,  52;  4,  19,  29 ;  9,  i;  u,  15,  36:  tfre.  /^'re.  /^'re, 
Isae.,  n,  26;  Demos.,  27,  12:  pijdl  (four  times),  Demos.,  31, 
13  :  ovdt  (three  times),  Isae.,  3,  31 :  ovdl — dUd  (three  times), 
Isae.,  7,  35,  38:  /«yV  .  .  .  dUd  (three  times),  8,  20:  fttv.  8£.  dg, 
Isae.,  4,  12;  5,  5,  42;  10,  8;  n,  9,  10,  19:  Demos.,  29,  7;  30, 

II,  17,    30:    fi.lv.   dl.   Si.   en   dt.  dl.   dg,    Demos.,    27,   47:    ii.lv.   dti, 

(five  times),  Demos.,  29,  45 :       ^'.  ^',  27,  25. 

GORGIANIC  FIGURES.1 

Paronomasia,  Parechesis,  Parison,  Paromoion,  Antithesis. 
Paronomasia — Parechesis. 

The  broadest  definition  of  Paronomasia  is  given  by  Alex., 

III,  36.     Cf.  Tib.,  Ill,  71.     Phoebammon,  III,  47,  refers  to 
two  special  kinds  of  paronomasia,  viz. :    ( i )   play  on  words 
placed  near  one  another;  (2)  change  in  the  meaning  of  the 
same  word. 

Parechesis  is  specially  defined  by  Hermog.,  II,  251. 

From  the  definitions  and  illustrations  given  by  the  Greek 
rhetoricians,  it  is  evident  that  they  considered  paronomasia  and 
parechesis  as  nearly  synonymous  terms.  But  the  leading  illus- 
tration of  parechesis  given  by  Hermogenes,  tends  to  confirm 
the  distinction  observed  by  some  modern  scholars,2  viz. :  to 

1  These  figures  were  firmly  imbedded  in  the  language  before  the 
time  of  Gorgias.  But  he  was  the  first  to  apply  them  widely  to  prose; 
hence  they  are  called  Gorgianic. 

aBlass,  Isoc.,  160. 


16    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

consider  paronomasia  as  play  upon  words  with  the  same  root, 
and  parechesis,  as  play  upon  words  with  a  different  root.1 
Play  upon  words  is  popular,  and  used  within  proper  limits, 
naturally  pleases  the  ear,  and  lends  a  certain  beauty  to  the 
speech.  The  change  in  the  meaning  of  a  word  by  composition 
with  a  preposition,  Tiberius  describes  as  papurepov  re  xat  Aaju- 
Ttporepov.  But  when  the  contrasted  words  are  exactly  alike, 
or  differ  only  in  a  single  letter  or  accent,  the  play  is  much  more 
pleasing  and  graceful.  An  excessive  use  of  paronomasia  and 
parechesis  makes  the  language  stiff  and  devoid  of  spontaneity, 
as  is  the  case  with  Gorgias,  who  employs  them  simply  for  the 
sound. 

Antiphon  seldom  has  the  more  striking  forms  of  these  figures, 
and  they  were  by  nature  unsuited  to  the  elevated  diction  of 
Isocrates.  Cf.  Blass,  Isoc.,  160-1,  Demos.,  141.  But  as  a  play 
upon  words  helps  to  represent  the  character  of  the  speakers, 
Lysias 2  and  Isaeus  frequently  indulge  in  the  figure. 

Paronomasia. — Isaeus  is  fond  of  the  paronomasia  brought 
about  by  a  change  of  the  preposition  in  a  verbal  root,  chiefly  in 
legal  terminology.  A  special  stress  is  thus  laid  upon  the  differ- 
ent meanings  of  the  words :  i,  39  (cf.  2,  3,  5  ;  3,  8,  48,  51 ;  8,  8, 
(twice)  ;  10,  25)  ;  2,  9 ;  5,  i,  23,  28,  34 ;  6,  36,  43,  50 ;  8,  36 ;  10, 
24 ;  n,  6.  Demosthenes  has  few  cases  of  such  a  change  in  the 
preposition  of  a  compound :  27,  69 ;  29,  30,  52.  Similar  in 
effect  is  the  use  of  a  compound  after  a  simple  form.  This  is 
frequent  in  Isaeus,  i,  15,  29 ;  2,  5,  8,  43 ;  3,  42 ;  4,  12 ;  5,  10,  26, 
29;  6,  10 ;  8,  8,  10,  15,  23;  9,  28,  30;  10,  20;  n,  10;  but 
seldom  in  Demos.,  28,  14 ;  29,  37 ;  30,  39. 

The  active  and  passive  of  the  same  verb  produce  a  certain 
kind  of  paronomasia:  Isae.,  i,  39;  2,  39;  3,  13,  16,  39,  55,  70, 
72:  Demos.,  27,  45  ;  29,  31,  55  ;  30,  37. 

The  same  word  following  with  a  different  ending  as  obdev} 
ouSgv  is  found  in  every  period  of  Greek. 

The  few  instances  in  our  orators  are  without  special  rhetorical 
effect. 

1  In  parechesis  thus  defined,  the  roots  may  differ  only  in  a  single  letter 
or  accent,  or  they  may  be  entirely  different  but  pronounced  somewhat 
alike. 

"Berbig  cites  22  examples  from  Lysias. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     17 

A  play  on  words  of  similar  sound  may  possibly  be  intended 
in  the  following:  Isaeus,  i,  22,  25,  26,  51  ;  2,  10,  12,  17,  23,  25, 
27,  28,  46;  3,  i,  6,  14,  36,  47,  48,  59,  77  (twice)  ;  5,  3,  7,  21,  24, 
25  >  34>  37>  S^,  43  (the  play  with  novel  compounds  is  decidedly 
the  most  striking  in  Isaeus),  46;  6,  4,  6,  10,  15,  21  ;  7,  6,  9; 
8,  5,  13.  3i»  335  9>  19;  10,  14,  38,  45-  Demos.,  27,  16,  21,  45, 
50,  59,  61,  62,  64;  28,  9,  15,  17;  29,  7,  9,  10,  n,  13,  15,  17,  18, 
20,  23,  31,  41,  45.  54,  55,  56,  57;  3<>»  3,  8,  19,  24,  32,  39;  31,  11. 

Parechesis.  —  (i)  Play  on  adjoining  words  is  found  in  Isaeus, 
2,  1  8,  mvat  TWat'  25>  26>  27>  39  J  3»  4,  12,  43  ;  4»  24  ;  6,  17,  20, 
olvos  ttmoc.  8,  7;  Demos.,  27,  8,  10,  49,  68;  28,  4,  17;  29,  22, 
45,  5°,  56;  30,  18;  31,  4.  (2)  Verbs  compounded  with  the 
same  preposition.1  Isaeus,  2,  6;  3,  26;  5,  18;  6,  i  ;  8,  16,  25, 
38;  n,  37:  Demos.,  28,  15  ;  29,  17;  30,  18.  (3)  The  following 
may  be  due  to  assonance  or  accident  :  Isae.,  i,  46,  54  ;  5,  46  ; 
6,  59  ;  8,  i,  26,  34,  40,  45  ;  10,  15  ;  Demos.,  27,  59  ;  28,  6  ;  29,  i, 
57;  30,  5,36. 

Parison. 


Denned  by  Alexander,  III,  40:    fldpiaov    imiv,    orav    duo    y 

stova  xa>Xa  ffusevtoOivra  fj.dXt.ffTa  JJLSV  xai  rdc  auXXaftds  "ffaq  ££#, 
*a'  TOV  dptOfiov  TOV  fffov  iv  rcdfft  Aa/i/3avjj. 

The  cola  must  be  equal,  Aristotle,  i,  137  ;  Anaximenes,  i,  213. 
The  definition  is  better  than  the  illustrations  ;  Zon.,  Ill,  169  ; 
Anon.,  Ill,  185.  Hermogenes,  II,  332-5  deals  rather  with  the 
effect  of  parisa,  and  how  to  prevent  an  accumulation  of 
homoioteleuta.  Cf.  II,  440.  In  Tiberius,  III,  74,  the  first 
part  of  the  definition  is  confused  with  paronomasia  ;  the  second 
treats  of  the  more  artistic  forms  of  parisa,  namely,  when  com- 
bined with  homoioptoton  and  homoioteleuton.  Cf.  Ill,  131, 

159. 
The  effect  of  parisa  is  described  by  Hermog.,  II,  332  :      Zw- 

de  xahd  a  xai  ixTrpexTJ  7ro£e?  rov  XO<T/IOV  x 


Parisa,  including  isocola,  are  a  substitute  in  prose  for  the 
equal  divisions  of  poetry,  and  if  they  do  not  become  too  artificial 
and  monotonous  by  excessive  use,  they  add  to  the  beauty  and 
strength  of  the  speech.  Hence  Demosthenes  frequently  uses 
them.  See  Hermogenes,  II,  334. 

1  For  Isocrates  see  Strange,  I.  I.  Sup.  B,  III,  31. 


1 8    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

In  Isaeus  who  like  Lysias  has  the  oratorical  grasp  and 
finish  of  thought,1  we  do  not  find  equal  cola  monotonously 
heaped  together,  for  such  ornament  was  little  suited  to  his 
energetic  and  vivacious  style.  He  regulated  his  clauses  more 
for  the  sake  of  emphasis  than  by  reason  of  any  preconceived 
length.  The  general  impression  of  Isaeus'  style  is  that  he 
loves  to  deal  sledge-hammer  blows,  by  presenting  his  ideas  in 
succession  rather  than  opposition.  Not  unfrequently,  how- 
ever, after  a  very  vigorous  onslaught,  he  winds  up  a  sentence 
with  an  almost  Isocratic  smoothness.  Isaeus  uses  a  greater 
number  of  equal  cola  in  the  proofs  and  arguments,  for  his 
keen,  analytic  mind  was  naturally  fond  of  balancing  or  off- 
setting like  evidence  and  proof.  Most  of  the  periods  in  Isaeus 
have  the  dual  form  with  tilv-dl,  which  is  apt  to  produce  more 
or  less  uniformity  in  the  length  of  the  cola.  Too  exact  a  cor- 
respondence is  prevented  by  a  change  in  the  position  of  the 
words,  by  the  insertion  of  extra  clauses,  and  above  all,  by  a 
chiastic  arrangement  of  the  clauses  themselves.  A  good  ex- 
ample of  Isaeus'  stricter  composition  is  found  in  i,  33:  ofetrle 
.  .  .  xaxa><;  icotetv .  The  correspondence  in  the  first  part  is 
quite  exact.  Monotony  is  destroyed  in  the  second  by  a 
chiastic  arrangement  of  the  pronouns,  and  the  participial  and 
infinitive  clauses. 

For  illustration  see  the  following:  i,  8,  20,  23,  34,  40,  42; 
2,  16,  17,  25,  30;  3,  55,  60;  4,  24;  5,  13,  15,  25;  6,  43,  53,  58; 
8,  17;  9,  12  ;  10,  17.  The  pgv  .  .  .  d£  terms  are  often  extended 
by  the  addition  of  dependent  clauses,  the  length  of  which  de- 
pends entirely  upon  the  mood  of  the  orator:  cf.  i,  6,  7;  2,  36, 
37;  7,  14;  8,  31.  Isaeus  frequently  connects  a  series  of 
parisa  with  copulative  conjunctions,  in  which  case  they  do  not 
form  an  oratorical  period :  6,  4,  18,  27,  38.  All  such  devices 
prevent  monotony  and  furnish  excellent  patterns  for  the  mixed 
style  brought  to  such  perfection  by  the  mature  Demosthenes.2 

Parallel  clauses  with  equal  cola  are  numerous,  though  the 
adjacent  sentences  may  vary  in  length :  i,  9,  17,  22,  31 ;  2,  20 ; 
4,  29;  9,  i.  Participial  clauses  of  equal  length  are  frequently 
used  in  masses:  7,  n,  17;  8,  31 ;  10,  25,  26;  n,  23.  So  also 
a  series  of  dependent  clauses  with  el:  n,  19,  26,  39.  It  is 

1Dionys.,  Lys.,  6;  Isae.,  3.  2  Blass,  I'sae.,  476;  Demos.,  125. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     19 

rather  doubtful  whether  Isaeus  at  any  time  uses  parisa  for 
mere  rhetorical  effect,  though  a  few  cases  occur  where  an 
additional  number  is  seemingly  added  for  the  sake  of  con- 
cinnity,  after  the  manner  of  Isocrates.  These  may  be  due  to 
chance  or  a  desire  for  emphasis :  i,  7,  29 ;  4,  n  ;  7,  44 ;  8,  15 ; 
10,  10,  22.  Cf.  Demos.,  27,  16 ;  29,  5,  2O.1 

Paromoion — Homoioteleuton. 
The  best  definition  of  paromoion  is  that  given  by  Aristotle, 

I,  137  J  xctpopotofftf  (KapofjLOtov)  d*  idv  ofiota  ra  eff%ara  £%TJ  ixdrspov 
TO  XO>)LOV.  dvdyxr]  Se  y  iv  dp^y*  ?)  iitl  TsXeuTrjs  £%sw.  xdl  dp%i)  /JLSV 
det  rd  ovofjLara,  7}  de  TS^SUTTJ  Taq  iff-^draq  ffuXXapds  y  TOO  avroo 

OVO/JLCLTOS  •KTOHTst'-   i)   TO   oLUTo   ovofj.a.     Homoioteleuton  is  defined 

by  Alexander,  III,  35  :  or«v    efc    TO    O.OTO    p.6pwv    xXsovdxts    xa.Ta- 

Ifrwfiev     Cf.  Zon.,  Ill,  169. 

Homoioteleuton? 

When  verse  was  laid  aside  and  the  colon  took  its  place,  the 
tendency  in  artistic  composition  was  to  fall  into  rhyme,  the 
office  of  which  is  to  mark  the  end,  or  help  the  recognition  of 
equalities  and  proportions.  In  Greek  prose,  rhyme  was  first 
sought  and  then  avoided.  But  as  its  use  satisfied  a  craving 
for  symmetry,  it  took  a  long  time  for  prose  to  free  itself  from 
the  improper  use  of  an  ornament  which,  when  carried  to  an 
excess,  greatly  weakened  and  impaired  the  natural  strength  of 
the  language.  Isocrates  who  may  be  regarded  as  the  continuer 
of  Gorgias,  speaks  of  the  favor  with  which  the  ornamental 
figures,  among  them  homoioteleuton,  were  received  by  the 
people.*  According  to  Anaximenes,  also,  they  are  indispensable 
to  the  orator,  and  Aristotle  approves  of  them.5  Dionysius, 

1  Other  examples  of  parisa  will  be  given  under  homoioteleuton  and 
antithesis,  as  the  most  artistic  forms  occur  in  connection  with  these 
two  figures. 

aThis  produces  homoiokatarkton  of  which  there  is  no  well-defined 
instance  in  Isaeus  or  Demosthenes. 

3  Since    homoioteleuton    and    the    form    of    paromoion    which    most 
frequently  occurs,  are  the  same,  the  two  will  be  treated  together  under 
homoioteleuton. 

4  Isoc.,  Panath.,  2-3.  °  Blass.,  Isoc.,  162. 


2O    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 
however,  complains  of  Thucydides,  Plato,  and  Isocrates  for 

using  such   }).£tpa.xtu>dy  ff^-ijjj.ara.1 

What  displeased  the  rhetorician  was  the  excessive  use  of  such 
figures  in  species  of  composition  for  which  they  were  not  suited.2 
Hermogenes,  II,  333-4,  describes  how  Demosthenes  avoided  the 
use  of  too  many  homoioteleuta  in  his  parisa.  He  censures 
their  use  for  mere  beauty  to  the  detriment  of  persuasiveness. 

Both  Tiberius  3  and  Cornificius  *  say  that  the  figure  is  pro- 
ductive of  beauty  if  not  used  to  an  excess.  Cicero 5  denies  to 
the  genus  dicendi  tenue  the  use  of  parison,  homoioteleuton, 
etc.,  although  Lysias,  the  great  representative  of  this  style, 
furnishes  many  instances. 

As  Isaeus  recognized  the  practical  needs  of  Athens  and 
wished  to  be  an  advocate  and  interpreter  of  the  laws,  he  felt 
that  too  much  polish  was  little  adapted  to  the  purposes  and 
struggles  of  real  life.  He  did  not,  however,  entirely  neglect 
external  ornaments,  among  them,  homoioteleuta.  Many  of 
these  are  doubtless  due  to  chance,  though  the  influence  of  the 
Gorgianic  school  may  be  detected  at  times.  But  what  in  the 
latter  interrupted  the  flow  of  the  speech,  by  a  judicious  use  in 
Isaeus,  was  made  to  serve  the  thought  itself,  or  give  definite 
color  to  it.  Isaeus  had  no  difficulty  in  making  into  a  real  help, 
what  in  a  less  emphatic  orator,  would  have  been  a  mere 
jingle  of  words. 

The  effect  of  homoioteleuton  is  increased  when  combined 
with  parison  and  antithesis.  The  most  important  instances  of 
such  combination  in  Isaeus  are  the  following:  Homoioteleuton 
and  Parison:  i,  14,  15,  17,  19,  23,  26,  29,  39,  40;  2,  n,  35; 
3,  40,  46,  49,  54,  60,  63 ;  4,  5,  9,  10,  n,  12,  13,  20,  21,  24,  29; 
5,  3,  4,  44;  6,  18,  43,  60;  7,  5,  13,  29,  32,  38,  39,  40,  43,  44; 
8,  i,  13,  16,  33,  38,  41,  43,  44;  9,  10,  15,  19,  27;  10,  n,  15,  17, 
19 ;  n,  4,  14,  19,  22,  24,  28,  29,  30,  33,  36,  37,  49. 

The  first,  fourth,  seventh,  eighth,  and  eleventh  speeches  have 
the  greater  number  of  homoioteleuta. 

'Dionys.,  Demos.,  20,  26;  Thueyd.,  24,  29,  46;  Epist.  II,  ad  Amm.  17. 
Dionysius  had  trouble  in  harmonizing  austere  harmony  with  Gorgianic 
jingles.  Prof.  G. 

2  Dionys.,  Isoc.,  13 ;  de  Adm.  Vi.  4.  See  the  interesting  remarks  of 
Demetrius,  III,  267. 

a  III,  74  4 IV,  22,  23.  *  Orator,  84. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     21 

Demosthenes. 

Demosthenes  has  more  of  the  epideictic  element  in  his  early 
speeches  than  Isaeus.  This  is  especially  true  of  the  first 
speech  against  Aphobus  :l  El  iJ.lv  .  .  .  r««e?v,  rj  .  .  .  irctrplxsiv. 
If  we  compare  the  corresponding  sections  in  Isaeus,  8,  5,  and 
Demosthenes,  27,  1-2,  we  find  that  the  words  icpfc  i;(j.pa<jxzuas 
Xoftav  xdl  fidpropas  ou  rdtyOjj  papTupoovras  in  Isaeus  are  so  ar- 
ranged by  Demosthenes  that  the  cola  correspond  and  close 
with  a  homoioteleuton :  xpos  faSpaq  xa\  Afyetv  Ixavobq  xai 
xapaffxsudffaffOat  tovaplvouz*  In  addition,  Demosthenes  has 
formed  his  passage  more  artistically  than  Isaeus  by  making  all 
the  clauses  depend  upon  olda  ph  03»,  by  inserting  in  the 
second  half  xafasp  /roAu  rourtov  xaradt^ffrspoy  wv,  and  by  writ- 
ing rd  y£yev7){i.£ya  dts^eXOe'iv,  instead  of  rd  dtxata  etxelv.  It  may  be 

noted,  however,  that  he  abstains  from  homoioteleuton  in  the  last 
clause,  though  it  could  have  been  produced  by  a  slight  change 
of  words.  The  general  effect  is  weakened  by  the  artistic 
structure  which  strongly  tends  to  cast  in  the  minds  of  the  judges 
a  distrust  of  his  pretended  inexperience  because  of  youth. 
But  it  forms  an  excellent  example  of  what  Dionysius 3  says 
about  both  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes. 

Further  examples  of  the  epideictic  style  in  Dem.,  27,  are  in 
4,  6, 13, 15,  16,  23,  24,  25,  27,  30,  34,  45,  46,  47,*  52,  55,  59,  60, 
62,  63,  64,  65,  66,  67.  We  need  only  compare  the  homoioteleuta 

aThe  rhetoricians  are  fond  of  citing  as  something  very  unusual  the 
homoioteleuton  at  the  beginning  of  the  speech  against  Androtion. 
Hermogenes,  II,  332,  says  that  he  can  find  no  other  example  in  the 
orator.  As  the  commentary  of  Hermogenes  has  been  lost,  we  cannot 
tell  why  he  thought  Demosthenes  began  his  speech  in  this  way. 
The  scholiasts  think  that  he  was  trying  to  bring  his  opponent  into 
ridicule  by  beating  Isocrates  at  his  own  game.  Cf.  Walz,  VII,  1038; 
VI,  329.  But  the  homoioteleuta  in  Demos.,  27,  i,  Isae.,  8,  i,  Isoc.,  in 
Demon,  i,  show  that  such  instances  are  not  so  rare  as  the  scholiasts 
seem  to  think.  But  see  Blass,  Demos.,  138. 

2  The   words    <j>ei>-yuv   ovrug    aKpifie'i?    eteyxov£  in   Isae.  8,    13,   forms   a 
homoioteleuton  in  Demos.  30,  37 :  ovrof  .  . .  fyvyuv  KCU  ...  TrapaAnr&v. 

3  Isae.,  4. 

4 This  heaping  up  of  homoioteleuta  shows  the  inexperience  of  youth. 
Isocrates  seldom  has  more  than  two  endings  alike.  Continuation  in 
Lysias  is  very  rare.  In  the  recapitulation,  Isae.,  8,  28,  there  are  but 
four  unimportant  homoioteleuta  in  short  participial  clauses. 


22    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

in  the  eighth  speech  of  Isaeus  with  the  above  to  see  how  much 
more  Demosthenes  in  his  earliest  years  was  given  to  the  orna- 
mental style.  In  the  twenty-eighth  speech  of  Demosthenes, 
which,  being  a  deuterology,  is  formed  on  a  different  standard, 
we  find  shorter  periods  and  fewer  striking  homoioteleuta :  4,  5, 
7,  8,  9,  1 6,  1 8,  22.  The  twenty-ninth  has  also  far  less  of  the 
epideictic  element  than  the  twenty-seventh.  The  periods  are 
not  so  well  formed  and  there  are  fewer  cases  of  parisa  and 
homoioteleuta :  *  i,  3,  9,  36,  41,  44,  46,  51,  57,  59,  60.  Since  the 
orator  had  made  great  advancement  in  his  art  since  the  delivery 
of  the  twenty-seventh  speech,  traces  of  Isocratic  influence  in 
the  thirtieth  are  much  less  marked.  "  The  speech  is  lighter  and 
the  composition  better  rounded."  Homoioteleuton  is  kept 
within  more  artistic  limits:  2,  6,  7,  13,  16,  18,  21,  22,  23,  25,  30, 
33>  34>  36,  37,  38.  The  best  examples  of  homoioteleuta  in  the 
thirty-first  speech,  also  a  deuterology,  are  found  in  14:  rov  Se 
xat  .  .  .  Tta.Qs.l.v. 

A  number  of  homoioteleuta  in  Isaeus  consists  in  clausulae  or 
short  phrases  :  i,  5,  15,  30 ;  2,  25,  26 ;  3,  20 ;  4,  10 ;  5,  8 ;  6,  57 ; 
7,  17,  18,  28,  30,  43;  8,  30;  9,  4,  24,  25,  32;  10,  i,  13,  24;  n,  6, 
12,  40,  48. 

As  Demosthenes  has  a  different  periodology,  clausulae  or 
short  phrases  are  less  numerous :  27,  2,  4,  28,  31,  41,  46,  52,  63  ; 
28,  7,  22,  24.  The  rhetorical  effect  of  such  clausulae  or  short 
phrases  is  slight,  as  they  generally  occur  within  one  colon. 

Cases  of  accidental  or  unintentional  homoioteleuta  are  nu- 
merous in  both  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes. 

Antithesis.2 

The  Greek  rhetoricians  vary  greatly  in  their  definitions  and 
conception  of  antithesis.  Aristotle,  i,  136-7,  speaks  of  it  in 
connection  with  periodology. 

Hermogenes,  II,  236,  is  too  general  in  his  definition  for  a 
rhetorical  antithesis,  although  what  he  says  about  the  effect  of 
the  figure,  is  applicable.  Cf.  Anon.,  Ill,  112.  Anaximenes,  i, 

1  Blass,  Demos.,  210. 

3  As  the  Greek  rhetoricians  are  by  no  means  agreed  whether  antithesis 
is  a  figure  of  language  or  thought,  it  has  been  described  here  as 
forming  a  good  transition  to  the  figures  of  thought. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes    23 


212,  speaks  of  antithesis  as  consisting  (i)  in  words,  (2) 
in  thoughts,  or  (3)  in  both  words  and  thoughts.  The  last  he 
considers  the  best.  See  an  interesting  discussion  by  Alexander, 
III,  36.  Cf.  Herod.,  Ill,  98  ;  Zon.,  Ill,  169  ;  Anon.,  Ill,  186. 
Tiberius,  III,  78,  refers  to  antithesis  with  large  cola  and  to 
a  sharper  contrast  in  the  words  themselves.  The  latter  part  of 
Anaximenes'  definition  has  been  adhered  to  as  giving  a  good 
norm  for  comparison.  Volkmann  approves  of  it,  saying  that 
as  a  real  rhetorical  figure,  only  those  antitheses  should  be 
considered,  which  combine  opposition  in  words  with  opposition 
in  thought.  Antithesis  is  basic  in  the  language  of  the  Greeks, 
and  is  a  natural  product  of  their  acuteness  (Miiller).  It  occurs 
as  far  back  as  Homer,  and  hence  is  wrongly  ascribed  by  Benn 
to  the  Pythagorean  doctrine.  While  too  many  antitheses  injure 
the  swing  of  the  sentence,  a  moderate  use  of  them  is  very 
important  and  indispensable  to  the  orator.  Aristotle,  I,  137, 
says  that  things  opposed  by  being  placed  side  by  side  become 
very  clear,  and  there  is  awakened  in  the  hearer  the  agreeable 
feeling  of  easy  perception. 

The  effect  of  antithesis  is  also  described  by  Hermogenes, 
II,  236,  and  Tiberius,  III,  78.  Antithesis  besides  forming  a 
real  or  supposed  opposition  in  thought,  gave  the  structure  of 
the  sentence  an  appearance  of  symmetry  and  regularity. 
Hence  along  with  antithesis  occurred  the  other  Gorgianic  fig- 
ures; for  antithetic  thought  brought  with  it  antithetic  ex- 
pression, which  probably  brought  with  it  parisa,  and  these  in 
turn  were  likely  to  produce  rhyme  and  hence  homoioteleuta. 
Gorgias,  who  may  be  considered  the  founder  of  artistic  Greek 
prose,  made  a  very  free  use  of  antitheses,  but  owing  to  the 
nature  of  his  periodology  they  were  too  short,  and  often  con- 
sisted in  mere  sound  rather  than  sharply  contrasted  significa- 
tions. (Blass,  Gorgias.)  The  figure  found  a  much  better 
representative  in  Antiphon  because  his  periods  were  more 
extended.  His  antitheses,  which  are,  in  fact,  the  ground-work 
of  his  style,  are  formed  by  an  equal  number  of  like-sounding 
words  balanced  against  one  another.  He  is  fond  of  opposing 
words  of  similar  sound  so  as  to  call  attention  to  their  con- 
trasted meaning.  (Miiller.)  All  Antiphon's  efforts  are  di- 
rected to  the  invention  and  contrasting  of  ideas  in  order  to 


24    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

bring  out  the  argument.  Hence  his  antitheses  are  sharper 
than  those  of  Gorgias,  more  pointed  than  those  of  Thucydides,1 
but  often  lack  the  artistic  finish  given  them  by  Lysias  and 
Isocrates. 

To  Lysias,  antitheses  were  second  nature,  and  were  often 
made  use  of  as  instruments  of  precision,  when  they  were  not 
necessarily  demanded  by  the  matter  itself.  Professor  Jebb 
says  that  this  love  of  antithesis  shown  on  a  larger  scale  in  the 
terse,  periodic  composition,  is  the  one  thing  which  sometimes 
blemishes  the  ethos  in  Lysias.  Isocrates,  in  his  earlier  speeches, 
cultivated  the  antithetical  style,  but  finding  that  it  was  too  stiff 
and  rigid  for  even-flowing  and  well-rounded  sentences,  aban- 
doned the  direct  and  immediate  opposition  of  clauses,  and 
brought  forward  his  antitheses  in  successive  groups  and  in 
larger  series  (Miiller).  Isaeus  for  the  most  part  uses  antith- 
esis to  bring  his  arguments  more  clearly  before  the  minds  of 
the  judges  and  to  clinch  them  as  it  were.  The  opposite  is 
supplied  for  the  sake  of  definiteness,  rarely  for  fulness,  and  by 
concentrating  everything  on  one  word  or  set  of  words,  he 
makes  the  principal  thought  stand  out  in  clear  relief.  Hence 
the  sharpness  and  exactness  of  his  antitheses  are  often  very 
great.  While  Demosthenes  points  and  hardens  his  antitheses 
when  he  condescends  to  use  them,  the  length  of  the  cola  in  these 
early  speeches  prevents  the  same  conciseness  that  we  find  in 
Isaeus.  Both  orators  depend  upon  the  exact  significations  of 
words  to  express  their  ideas.  Both  delight  in  bringing  their 
contrasts  forcibly  before  the  minds  of  the  judges,  but  in  so 
doing,  often  round  off  the  clauses  so  as  to  produce  good 
periods,  assisted  by  the  outward  graces  of  parison  and  homoio- 
teleuton.  Antithesis  and  Parison:  Isaeus,  i,  I,  2,  6,  20,  26, 
30,  33>  34,  38,  42,  43;  2,  9>  15.  26>  30;  3,  60;  4,  22;  5,  n,  17, 
21,  38,  39,  40;  6,  41,  51,  59;  7,  2,  12,  15,  20,  23,  29,  44;  8,  29, 
32,  39;  10,  2,  16,  22;  n,  21,  31,  39;  12,  10 :  Demosthenes, 
27,  i,  22,  24,  36,  37,  45>  51*  54;  28,  12,  18,  24;  29,  5,  8,  14,  15, 
43,  45,  58;  30,  7,  ii,  I2>  19>  25>  28,  33,  37,  38;  31,  7. 

Antithesis — Parison — Homoioteleuton :  Isaeus,  i,  29,  40; 
2,  6;  3,  60;  4,  i ;  5,  25,  44;  6,  52,  53,  56;  7,  29,  43,  44;  9,  10; 
n,  37 ;  Demos.,  27,  47,  55,  64,  65 ;  28,  7,  9,  24;  29,  2,  5,  9,  38, 

47- 

1  Blass,  Antiphon,  139. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     25 

About  one-half  of  the  antitheses  in  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes 
show  a  periodic  structure  more  or  less  exact:  Isae.,  i,  29,  30, 
33,  34,  35,  40,  42,  43,  5°,  51 ;  2>  6,  J5,  26,  30,  37 ;  3,  59,  60,  61, 
68,  75;  4,  i,  22;  5,  21,  25,  32,  40,  44,  46;  6,  6,  26,  52,  53; 

7,  i,  n,  12,  15,  23,  29,  44,  45;  8,  12,  25,  26,  31,  44;  9,  10,  19, 
25,  34,  35;  10,  i,  2,  I0>  "»  i7»  22;  n,  6,  n,  12,  24,  31,  37,  39, 
48;  12,  4,  8,  10 :  Demos.,  27,  i,  15,  16,  20,  24,  33,  35,  37,  38,  45, 
54,  55,  57,  64,  65,  66,  67,  68;  28,  4,  7,  12,  17,  18,  22;  29,  2,  5, 

8,  12,  13,  14,  15,  21,  45,  47,  58;  30,  7,  n,  12,  15,  19,  23,  28,  31, 

33,  37,  38;3i,  7- 

Both  orators  are  fond  of  contrasting  the  conduct,  feelings, 
etc.,  of  the  opposite  parties:  Isaeus,  i,  20,  29,  30,  33,  34,  38, 
48,  51 J  3,  75,*  5,  15,  23,  33,  40,  44,  46,  47;  7»  2,  8,  n,  29,  43, 
45;  8,  37;  9»  25;  10,  n,  23,  24;  n,  31,  36,  37,  38,  39;  12,  6,  8, 
10,  ii ;  Demos.,  27,  6,  23,  35,  36,  38,  55,  57,  63,  64;  28,  10,  11, 
17,  18,  22,  24;  29,  12,  13,  14,  15,  16;  30,  4,  7,  12,  23,  31,  33,  37; 

3i»  7,  14- 

Isaeus  frequently  repeats  a  synonymous  or  common  term  in 
the  second  member  of  his  antithesis.  This  is  intended  to 
strengthen  the  thought  and  not  merely  to  obtain  a  more  sonor- 
ous ending,  or  to  give  an  artificial  regularity  to  the  clauses,  as 
so  often  happens  with  Lysias  and  Isocrates.1  Such  repetition 
is  apt  to  produce  a  certain  periodic  structure  which  may  be 
unintentional:  Isae.,  i,  17,  29,  42;  2,  30;  3,  59,  60,  61,  68;  5, 
25,  32 ;  6,  6,  52,  53,  58 ;  7,  15,  20 ;  8,  12,  25,  26,  32 ;  9,  4,  10,  15, 
34;  10,  22.  Demosthenes  does  not  repeat  the  common  term  so 
frequently :  28,  7,  12 ;  29,  5 ;  30,  28.  At  times  the  second 
member  of  an  antithesis  in  Isaeus  is  not  filled  out,  e.  g. :  2,  43, 
44 ;  7,  8,  20 ;  n,  38,  cf.  Demos.,  29,  2.  Demosthenes,  who  has  a 
greater  tendency  to  the  periodic  structure,  seldom  uses  this 
form  of  antithesis. 

Chiasm  in  Antithesis. — Chiasm  emphasizes  both  sides  of  an 
antithesis.  For  its  effect,  see  Hermogenes,  II,  242.  Chiastic 
antitheses  are  very  forcibly  used  by  Isaeus,  e.  g. :  i,  3,  n,  29, 
30,  33,  34,  39,  48,  51 J  2,  15,  18,  26 ;  3,  13,  27,  59,  60,  75 ;  4,  28 ; 
5,  24,  27,  40;  6,  22,  52;  7,  4,  10,  15,  37;  8,  25,  26,  31  (two), 
38,  44;  10,  i,  22;  ii,  12,  36.  Although  Demosthenes  does  not 
use  such  antitheses  so  frequently  as  Isaeus,  he  has  some  good 

.,  Prol.  Lys.,  12;  Blass,  Ant.  142;  Isoc.,  151. 


26    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

examples  :  27,  20,  66  ;  28,  10,  12  ;  31,  n.  The  particles,  p.t\>  .  .  .  d^ 
attack  different  members  of  the  antithesis  with  chiastic  effect.1 

The  itiv  .  .  .  tie  balance  with  chiasm  is  frequent  in  Isaeus  :  i, 
29>  30,  33.  34,  48,  51  ;  2»  26  ;  3,  59,  60,  75  ;  4,  28  ;  6,  52  ;  7,  15  ; 
8,  25,  26,  31,  38,  44  ;  n,  36.  Demosthenes  has  a  few  examples  : 
30,  7,  12,  31. 

Antithesis  with  Legal  and  Technical  Terms.  —  The  legal 
knowledge  of  Isaeus  is  well  shown  in  his  keen  and  exact  use 
of  legal  and  technical  terms.  The  fine  legal  distinctions,  which 
form  one  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  Isaeus'  style,  are 
brought  out  more  forcibly  by  the  use  of  antithesis  :  i,  3,  18,  26, 
35,  42,  43,  48;  2,  5,  19,  23,  26,  30,  43,  46;  3,  19,  59,  60,  61, 
68,  75;  4,  i,  22,  28;  5,  17,  25,  27,  32;  6,  24,  52,  53;  7,  20;  8, 
10,  12  (two),  31,  32;  9,  15,  25,  33,  35;  10,  2,  n,  12,  22;  n, 
n,  23,  24;  12,  ii.  There  are  no  striking  examples  of  such 
antithesis  in  the  younger  Demosthenes. 

Isaeus  has  antithesis  with  forms  of  £rjv  and  aTtoQvyffxztv: 
i,  46;  2,  15,  25,  36,  37,  45;  3,  58;  5,4;  7,  i,  14;  8,  31  (two), 
44;  ii,  12.  The  stiff  antithesis  with/^w  and  W9>,  so  common 
in  Antiphon,  is  seldom  found  in  Isaeus.  Cf.  II,  44. 

FIGURES  OF  THOUGHT. 
A. 

Questions. 

Dionysius  (de  Isaeo  Indicium)  after  speaking  of  some  of  the 
stylistic  differences  between  Lysias  and  Isaeus  says  in  chap.  12, 
that  Isaeus  is  more  varied  than  Lysias  both  in  the  composition 
of  words  and  the  use  of  figures,  for  in  Isaeus  one  can  find  many 
sets  of  questions  like  the  following  :  roflev  %p-r)  TturTsueffQat  rd 
,  npo$  Oeutv  ;  obx  ix  r&v  ij.apropu)v]  otopai  f£.  xoOev  de  robs 
;  ovx  ix  rwv  fiaffdvwv;  eixos  ^e.  nodev  8i  ye 
roue  TOUTWV;  ux  ix  TOO  yeuyeiv  robs  lAe 


Dionysius  further  remarks  in  chap.  13  :  raori  fj.ev 
xai  ins  piaryff  ecus'  olc  6  Auffiat;  p.h  r^xiara  xtypyrai' 
d£9  6  napa  rovrou  rdq  dyopftdq  Aa{3a»t  ayeiSlorepov.  Then 

f.  Gildersleeve,  Pindar,  O.  XI  (X),  8. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     27 

follows  a  long  quotation  from  Demosthenes,  Olyn.,  3,  34f.  On 
the  effect  of  these  questions  see  Blass,  Isaeus,  478.  Such 
questions  the  Greeks  ascribed  to  'the  tf/£/m  called  Y°PY°rys> 
in  respect  to  which  see  Hermogenes,  II,  344.  Cf.  Anon., 

in,  147. 

The  employment  of  these  energetic  and  pressing  questions 
may  be  regarded  almost  as  an  invention  of  Isaeus.  They  are 
seldom  used  by  Lysias  and  still  less  by  Isocrates,  whose  style 
proceeds  mostly  in  long,  extended  periods.  By  such  questions, 
Isaeus  proves  his  arguments,  as  it  were,  with  a  tone  of  triumph. 
He  grapples  with  his  opponent  in  open  court,  and  overpowers 
him  by  his  seeming  superiority,  or  he  bears  down  with  all  his 
impetuosity  upon  the  judges  themselves,  and  tries  to  force 
them  to  give  a  verdict  in  his  favor.  Hence  Dionysius,  1.  c.,  c. 
4,  remarks:  %v  Ss  itepl  auroo  dot-a  Ttapa  roT?  TOTS  yor/Tstas  xai 
difdrtj^  w$  detvos  dvyp  re^vtrsoffat  Aoyous  ire}  TO.  rcovypoTepa. 

These  questions  in  Isaeus  served  as  a  pattern  for  those 
brilliant  passages  found  in  the  matured  oratory  of  Demosthenes. 
Cf.  Dionys.,  1.  c.,  c.  13;  Blass,  Isaeus,  478.  In  Isaeus,  8,  28, 
is  found  a  passage  almost  identical  with  the  one  quoted  above 
from  Dionysius.  In  fact,  one  is  tempted  to  think  that  the 
words  may  be  a  locus  communis,  specially  prepared  for  use  in 
energetic  passages. 

As  Blass,  Isae.,  478,  remarks,  each  passage  is  periodic,  and 
has  a  decided  rhythm,  and  each  after  a  short  pause  is  followed 
by  asyndetic  narrative.  Cf.  8,  29.  The  passages  in  Isaeus  most 
similar  to  these  are  two  in  the  same  speech:  8,  14  and  33. 
Demosthenes  has  no  such  questions  in  his  early  speeches. 
Both  orators,  however,  often  interrupt  the  course  of  the  speech 
by  a  single  question  directed  to  the  judges,  to  the  opponent,  or 
to  themselves,  as  if,  in  the  matter  at  issue  they  had  to  consult 
with  others,  or  with  themselves,  to  obtain  the  necessary  in- 
formation. Such  argumentation  contributes  much  towards 
making  the  speech  lively  and  effective,  and  greatly  increases  the 
attention  of  the  hearers.  The  other  orators  do  not  use  such 
questions  so  frequently.  Specially  characteristic  of  Isaeus  and 
Demosthenes  are:  (i)  short  interrogative  formulae  at  the  end 
of  a  clause  instead  of  the  beginning  for  the  sake  of  clearness : 

IsaeUS,     5>      *3«       T£     Koirjaat.       43^     real     dvalwffas'       cf.     7,     43. 


28    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

These  formulae  do  not  occur  in  our  speeches,  but  are  abundant 
elsewhere  in  Demosthenes;  (2)  self-question  after  a  sentence 
fully  completed.  Cf.  Anon.,  Ill,  121.  This  is  the  most  artistic 
form  of  the  question.  Taken  as  it  were  from  the  inmost  soul 
of  the  speaker,  it  gives  to  the  speech  the  appearance  of  an 
interchange  of  thought  between  speaker  and  hearer.1  As  might 
be  expected,  this  question  is  rarely  found  in  the  early  orators. 
It  occurs  but  once  in  Antiphon,  in  an  oration,  6,  34,  which  in 
many  respects,  approaches  the  standards  of  later  oratory; 
twice  in  the  plain  and  even  style  of  Lysias,  13,  20,  64.  It  is 
also  found  in  Isocrates.  In  the  hands  of  Isaeus,  the  self- 
question  is  a  forcible  weapon.  Reh.,  p.  18.  Cf.  3,  24,  32;  5, 
12 ;  6,  36,  63  ;  7,  44 ;  8,  9,  30 ;  9,  22  ;  u,  1 1,  33,  44.  This  ques- 
tion occurs  in  Demosthenes :  27,  38 ;  29,  8,  n,  20,  31,  36 ;  31,  3. 

Rhetorical  Questions. 

The  questions  previously  considered  have  required  an  answer. 
It  is  different  with  the  purely  rhetorical  questions,  which  the 
orator  asks,  not  to  obtain  an  answer,  but  to  overpower  his 
opponent,  to  express  his  indignation  or  astonishment,  to  arouse 
hatred  or  compassion.  Cf.  Volkmann,  p.  491.  This  question, 
which  is  an  excellent  index  to  style,  imparts  great  liveliness  to 
oratory.  Orators  vary  in  their  use  of  the  rhetorical  question. 
Some  will  rise  to  their  questions,  or  mass  them,  as  Demos- 
thenes, others  will  scatter  them,  and  others  when  they  have  once 
commenced  to  use  them,  find  difficulty  in  stopping,  as  Gorgias 
in  the  Palamedes.  Lysias  attains  to  pathos  in  his  questions, 
and  this  is  their  greatest  attribute.  Jebb  says  that  Isocrates' 
use  of  the  rhetorical  question  is  in  concluding  an  argument. 
Isaeus  takes  no  special  part  of  the  marts  or  M<KS  in  which 
to  mass  his  questions,  but  when  he  is  aroused  by  some  unjust 
act  of  the  opponent,  or  wishes  to  overwhelm  him,  or  to  prove 
his  argument  by  frequently  referring  to  the  same  point,  he 
breaks  forth  in  a  series  of  questions,  and  forcibly  drives  home 
his  arguments.  This  may  even  happen  near  the  beginning  of 
an  oration,  as  in  the  powerful  £^7709,  n,  5.  In  the  third 
oration,  37f.,  Isaeus  repeats  the  questions  in  nearly  the  same 

1  See  Rehdantz . 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes    29 

form  for  the  sake  of  dwelling  upon  the  evidence  and  emphasiz- 
ing its  importance  in  the  minds  of  the  judges.  He  seems  loath 
to  leave  the  point,  and  so  attacks  it  in  its  different  phases  to 
make  sure  that  the  judges  understand  him.  This  series  of 
questions  is  the  most  interesting  in  Isaeus. 

Nowhere  does  he  treat  his  adversary  with  greater  irony. 
The  tone  is  that  of  a  mercantile  man,  who,  strong  in  his  right, 
pushes  his  advantage  against  dishonest  opponents.  A  series 
of  questions  in  the  same  self-confident  style,  after  an  outburst 
of  withering  irony,  is  seen  in  3,  32.  The  same  tone  is  found 
in  6,  25,  where  the  speaker  in  behalf  of  rich  clients,  harshly  and 
disdainfully  addresses  Androcles,  who  has  been  guilty  of  in- 
trigue. The  calmness  of  the  speaker  is  indicated  by  the 
rhetorical  finish  and  regularity  of  the  clauses,  the  first  and 
last  being  longer  than  the  intermediate.  Ironical  and  mocking 
jests  are  found  in  4,  7,  when  the  actions  of  those  seeking  the 
inheritance  are  described. 

A  series  of  artistically  formed  questions  occurs  in  7,  40, 
Such  questions  are  not  suited  to  argument  but  to  a  laudatory 
epilogue  in  the  epideictic  style. 

The  Rhetorical  Question  in  Demosthenes. 

No  orator  has  made  such  use  of  the  question  as  Demosthenes. 
In  these  early  speeches  the  strong  influence  of  Isaeus  is  easily 
recognized,  but  Demosthenes  because  of  his  inexperience,  only 
occasionally  handles  his  questions  with  the  same  vigor  as  his 
predecessor.  But  the  epilogue  of  the  twenty-eighth  speech  is  a 
notable  exception,  in  which  he  surpasses  any  passage  of  Isaeus 
in  respect  to  pathos.  Demosthenes  as  a  rule  works  himself  up  to 
the  question.  He  is  fond  of  discussing  each  point  of  his  case 
separately,  beginning  with  an  introduction  and  closing  with  a 
recapitulation,  in  which  he  frequently  employs  a  series  of 
questions.  Cf.  27,  21  (two  questions  with  TTWC  after  a 
dilemma)  ;  33  (question  as  answer)  ;  38,  (passionate  questions 
after  stating  the  adversary's  base  conduct).  Cf.  29,  32,  34.  In 
31,  9,  the  questions  are  quite  incisive  after  an  argument  from 
probability.  Argumentative  questions  in  the  epilogues  are  27, 
64;  31,  14.  Single  rhetorical  questions,  put  for  effect  only,  to 
attract  attention,  to  make  the  statement  more  vivid,  etc.,  are 


30    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

too  numerous  to  describe  in  detail:  Isaeus,  i,  n,  20,  25,  27; 
2,  26,  27,  43  ;  3,  17,  36,  37,  39,  41,  43,  46,  54;  4,  4,  7,  12,  15,  20, 
23 ;  5,  21 ;  6,  9,  26,  46,  53,  54,  56 ;  7,  24,  36 ;  8,  24,  43 ;  9,  26 ; 
n,  23;  12,  9:  Demos.,  27,  16,  29,  30;  28,  7,  18,  21 ;  29,  12,  20, 

21,  23,  24,  25,  36,  37,  47,  48;  30,  18,  20,  36;  31,  6,  8. 

Isaeus  uses  the  question  with  great  force  when  he  wishes 
•to  draw  a  conclusion  from  contraries  (sententia  ex  contrariis). 
This  conclusion  is  called  h6op.-rifj.a.  It  shows  a  thorough 
grasp  and  comprehension  of  the  subject,  and  can  be  used  with 
effect  only  by  a  speaker  whose  feelings  are  unusually  aroused, 
and  who  has  confidence  in  his  own  argumentative  powers: 
e.  g.,  i,  23,  29,  33,  35,  40 ;  2,  27 ;  3,  n,  45,  48,  69 ;  4,  4,  14,  24, 
25;  5»  34>  38;  6,  63;  8,  13,  32;  9,  12,  15,  37;  10,  13,  17;  n, 
12,  14,  24;  12,  8.  Demosthenes  does  not  use  this  question  so 
frequently.  Cf.  27,  21  f.,  28,  64;  29,  14,  53;  30,  16;  31,  9. 

Rhetorical  questions  with  negative  or  affirmative  answers. — 
The  addition  of  an  answer  to  the  rhetorical  question  is  speci- 
ally peculiar  to  Isaeus.  This  is  in  keeping  with  the  fiery  ardor 
and  impetuosity  of  his  nature,  for  he  seems  at  times  unwilling 
to  allow  a  question  to  stand  without  this  additional  expression 
to  his  feelings.  In  the  earlier  orators,  according  to  Herforth, 
there  are  only  three  such  answers,  all  in  Andocides,  de  Mys., 

22,  89,  102.     The  additional  answer  is  an  excellent  help  to  the 
practical  orator.     Demosthenes  has  it  in  nearly  all  his  speeches, 
due,  no  doubt,  to  the  influence  of  Isaeus.     Such  a  question  may 
be  used  as  one  of  the  tests  of  genuineness  in  the  Demosthenean 
corpus.1 

Negative  answers. — Isaeus,  i,  29,  40;  n,  39;  3,  37,  51,  66; 
7,  32;  8,  n,  32;  9,  31;  10,  17;  n,  13,  26:  Demosthenes,  27, 
48,  57,  59,  63;  29,  49,  57;  30,  34;  31,  5,  n,  13.  Affirmative 
answers  are  not  so  frequent:  Isaeus,  3,  25,  39,  48,  49;  8,  28: 
Demos.,  27,  63  ;  30,  30. 

Miscellaneous  Questions. 

7ra>£. — Although  many  questions  with  TTG>?  are  mere  form- 
ulae, as  ita>q  yap  ouv,  the  use*  of  Tt&s  often  shows  the 
speaker's  interest  in  the  subject,  and  compels  the  hearer  to  take 
part  in  his  feelings:  Isaeus,  i,  1152,  26,  27,  43  53,  n,  54,  56; 

'Herforth,  p.  8. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes     31 

4,  4,  12,  14,  19 ;  5,  38 ;  6,  9,  46,  53,  54,  58,  63 ;  7,  32 ;  8,  9,  30, 
32;  10,  13,  15,  37;  n,  4,  12,  26:   Demosthenes,  27,  16,  21,  28, 
47.  52,  59»  63>  64;  29,  14,  21,  23,  24,  25,  53,  55;  30,  16,  18; 
31,  13.     Questions  preceded  by  a  dependent  clause  generally 
have  some  logical  element:    Isaeus,  i,  25,  40;  2,  27,  39,  43; 
3,  n,  41,  45,  48,  69,  70;  4,  14,  15,  19,  23,  25  ;  5,  21  ;  6,  9,  56; 
7»  32,  33,  36;  8»  IT  J  9>  37;  IX»  4,  12,  19,  24,  26;  12,  8. 

Questions  with  Mffts  in  w  are  numerous :  Isaeus,  i,  25, 
26 ;  2,  26 ;  3,  32,  41,  47,  66,  721. ;  4,  4,  24 ;  5,  21,  43 ;  6,  46,  53, 
54,  58 ;  7,  24 ;  8,  30,  33 ;  10,  13,  19,  24 :  Demos.,  27,  21,  52,  63  ; 

28,  7 ;  29,  14,  23,  24,  34,  37,  40 ;  31,  5,  8,  13. 

Isaeus  often  introduces  a  question  after  the  reading  of  a  law 
or  testimony,  in  order  to  bring  out  its  contents  more  clearly, 
or  to  show  an  exulting  triumph  over  his  opponent :  Isaeus,  i, 
33 ;  3,  39,  43,  54,  7i»  77  J  5,  34 ;  7>  33 ;  *>  14,  28 ;  9,  26,  31 ;  n, 

5,  12,  23,  47.     There  are  two  examples  in  Demosthenes :    27, 

29,  47.     The  force  of  the  question  is  often  increased  by  combi- 
nation with  other  lively  figures,  as  anaphora:    Isaeus,  2,  21; 
3,  40,  43;  4,  7;  5,  21,  455  7»  40;  8,  14,  28;  n,  25:    Demos- 
thenes, 27,  38 ;  28,  18;  30,  30 ;  31,  13,  14.     Both  the  Greeks  and 
Latins  are  fond  of  inserting  a  relative  clause  after  a  question, 
more  often  when  the  question  contains  a  negative  idea.     There 
are  a  few  examples  in  both  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes :   Isaeus, 
3,  39 ;  6,  26,  56 ;  7,  40 :  Demos.,  27,  29,  64 ;  29,  48 ;  30,  16,  20. 

The  home  of  the  question  is  in  the  nterts  and  A6<n<r,  but  it 
is  also  found  in  lively  narrative  and  more  frequently  still  in 
an  epideictic  or  passionate  epilogue :  Narrative  :  Isaeus,  5,  13  ; 

6,  36;  Prothesis:    Isaeus,  8,  30;  n,  4,  5:    Demos.,  31,  3,  5: 
Transition :  Isae.,  8,  9 :  Demos.,  29,  8 :  Epilogue :  Isaeus,  5,  34, 
38,  43,  45,  46;  6,  63  (twice)  ;  7,  40,  44;  8,  43 ;  9,  37:   Demos., 
27,  63,  64;  28,  18,  21 ;  29,  55 ;  31,  n,  13,  14. 

Hypophora. — Defined  by  Tiberius,  III,  77 ;  Hermogenes,  II, 
207 ;  Cornificius,  IV,  23,  33.  Hypophora  is  one  of  the  favorite 
methods  of  surprise,  by  which  the  ordinary  course  of  the  speech 
is  interrupted  and  a  lively  conversational  or  dramatic  element 
introduced.  The  figure  is  productive  of  beauty  and  energy, 
Tiberius,  III,  77. 

The  most  artistic  form  of  hypophora  occurs  when  a  speaker, 
who  wishes  to  make  a  general  refutation,  brings  forward  the 


32    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

particulars,  one  after  the  other,  in  the  form  of  a  question,  and 
then  rejects  them.  Hypophora  is  found  in  all  the  preceding 
orators  and  also  in  the  tragedians.  The  form  of  hypophora  in 
Isaeus  is  less  regular  and  artistic  than  that  in  Lysias  and  Isoc- 
rates,  and  seems  nearer  to  the  later  Demosthenean  type,  es- 
pecially in  the  use  of  v^  J/a,  which  frequently  occurs  in  the 
form  of  an  ironical  question :  cf .  3,  24,  73 ;  4,  20,  24 ;  7,  33. 
In  these  earlier  speeches  Demosthenes  gives  us  but  little  idea 
of  the  extent  to  which  he  uses  this  formula  later.  We  find 
one  example  with  ^Ud  ^  Aiat  31,  10,  but  it  is  hardly  more 
than  a  strong  transition.  Isaeus,  like  Lysias,  uses  continued 
hypophora  for  the  purpose  of  raising  numerous  objections, 
which  he  immediately  disposes  of. 

Special  points  of  an  argument  are  thus  summed  up  in  a 
vigorous  and  energetic  manner.  A  series  of  rhetorical  ques- 
tions frequently  precedes :  2,  21 ;  3,  73 ;  4,  20 ;  5,  451. ;  7,  33 ; 
n,  25.  The  only  striking  instance  of  hypophora  in  the  guar- 
dianship-speeches is  found  in  the  passionate  epilogue  in  28, 
18:  cf.  29,  41.  Like  several  examples  in  Isaeus,  it  is  preceded 
by  a  series  of  rhetorical  questions  and  followed  by  asyndeton. 
Objection  with  dUd  at  the  end  of  a  question  is  akin  to  hypo- 
phora and  introduces  more  or  less  dramatic  element:  Isaeus, 
i,  29,  34 ;  2,  21 ;  3,  11,  43,  69,  72,  77 ;  4,  19 ;  5,  46 ;  6,  25 ;  7,  32, 
33;  8,  n,  13;  n,  25,  47:  Demos.,  27,  16,  28;  28,  18;  30,  30; 
3i,  i3>  M. 

B. 

FIGURES  OF  THOUGHT  USED  WITH  MODERATION  BY  ISOCRATES. 
Prodiorthosis — Paraleipsis. 

Prodiorthosis. — Defined  by  Alexander,  III,  14.  As  a  figure 
of  thought,  prodiorthosis  will  meet  a  reproach,  a  surprise,  or 
an  erroneous  view,  caused  by  a  subsequent  statement.  It 
shows  a  free  and  confident  style  of  argument,  and  is  found 
in  a  wide  range  of  Greek  from  Homer  on.  There  are  several 
good  examples  in  Isaeus:  6,  17;  8,  5,  34;  n,  5.  Two  cases  in 
Demos.,  27,  3,  8.  Both  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes  are  fond  of 
using  expressions  that  serve  as  transitions  to  what  they  expect 
to  say  or  prove:  Isaeus,  i,  15,  31 ;  2,  2,  13,  16,  19,  28,  38;  3, 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes    33 

n,  19,  34;  5,  14;  8,  34:  Demos.,  27,  8,  9,  12,  23,  24,  26,  27,  34, 
35»  39>  52,  58  J  28»  i«  2  5  29»  i,  4,  9>  IO>  J4>  l8>  22,  25,  28,  29,  35 ; 
30,  4,  5,  7,  9,  14,  19,  25,  32,  34;  31,  i,  4. 

Promise  of  brevity  also  comes  under  the  head  of  prodiortho- 
sis:  Isaeus,  i,  8,  17;  6,  19;  7,  4:  Demos.,  27,  3,  12;  29,  5. 
Epidiorthosis. — Described  by  Alexander,  III,  15.  We  have 
such  subsequent  explanation  of  an  assertion  to  prevent  offense 
to  the  judges  in  Isae.,  5,  8. 

Paraleipsis — Pretended  omission. — Defined  by  Alexander, 
III,  23.  See  also  Hermogenes,  II,  374.  By  this  pretended 
omission,  the  speaker  really  brings  forward  all  that  he  desires, 
and  is  saved  from  dwelling  on  the  less  important  subjects,  or 
is  enabled  to  give  hints  only,  where  fuller  details  would  be  to 
his  disadvantage. 

The  more  subtle  uses  of  paraleipsis  belong  to  practical 
oratory.  The  figure  does  not  occur  in  Antiphon,  but  certain 
forms  of  it  are  found  in  Lysias  and  Isocrates.1  There  are  two 
well-defined  instances  in  Isaeus,  both  of  which  come  under 
Hermogenes*  description,  viz.,  5,  17;  n,  43.  There  is  an 
approach  to  the  figure  in  Demos.,  29,  50. 

C. 

FIGURES  OF  THOUGHT  NOT  FOUND  IN  ISOCRATES. 

Prolepsis,  Diaporesis,  Anakoinosis,  Oaths,  Direct  Quotation, 
Apostrophe,  Irony. 

Prolepsis  consists  in  taking  away  beforehand  from  the  op- 
ponent the  arguments  which  he  is  likely  to  advance  against 
the  speaker.2  It  belongs  to  practical  oratory,  and  is  frequently 
found  in  Isaeus :  i,  36 ;  3,  45  ;  5,  3,  28,  46 ;  10,  18.  There  are 
two  hints  at  prolepsis  in  Demosthenes :  27,  51 ;  28,  16. 

Diaporesis  is  defined  by  Tiberius,  III,  61 :     orav    ws    dta- 

Ttopwv  Tf?  a  dst  etnelv  xdxeiva  xal  er«  irXsiat  Alyrj.      See    Alexander, 

III,  24,  and  Phoe.,  Ill,  54.  As  a  real  figure  of  thought,  the 
best  example  in  Isaeus  occurs  in  9,  22.  In  the  following  pas- 
sages the  doubt  lies  rather  in  the  meaning  of  the  words  them- 
selves :  6,  21,  24 ;  7,  33,  45  ;  8,  46 ;  n,  36.  There  are  two  such 
cases  in  Demosthenes :  27,  66 ;  28,  7. 

Demos.,  157.  *See  Volkmann,  p.  494. 


34    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

Anakoinosis  takes  place  when  the  orator  asks  his  opponent 
for  advice,  or  deliberates  and  consults,  as  it  were,  with  the 
judges  themselves.  There  are  two  instances  in  Isaeus:  3,  n  ; 

9>  35- 

Oaths. — In  oaths  greater  the  god,  less  the  propriety.  In 
ancient  times  propriety  decreases  according  to  height.  Po- 
seidon and  Athena  are  always  struggling  for  supremacy.  With 
Zeus,  Poseidon,  and  Athena  there  is  no  special  propriety,  but 
with  Apollo  there  is  an  appeal  for  religious  rites  and  tastes 
of  art.1  In  Isaeus  who  uses  the  oath  more  than  any  preceding 
orator,  there  is  one  oath  with  Zeus  and  Apollo,  6,  41.  The 
oath  with  xpos*  is  used  twice,  2,  47 ;  6,  58. 

The  force  of  such  oaths  as  vy  Aia,  /*«  rotxr  0eou?,  etc.,  is 
greatly  weakened,  because  they  are  used  so  often  in  every-day 
life.  Cf.  3,  25,  48,  73 ;  4,  20 ;  7,  33 ;  3,  39,  49 ;  4,  24 ;  8,  29 ; 
n,  36. 

The  earlier  school  had  more  influence  upon  the  younger 
Demosthenes  than  Isaeus.  He  uses  the  oath  but  three  times, 
all  in  the  twenty-ninth  oration,  §§32,  57,  59.  This  showing  is 
rather  remarkable  when  we  consider  the  great  and  varied  use 
of  the  oath  by  the  orator  in  his  later  speeches. 

Direct  Quotation. — This  takes  place  when  the  orator  repre- 
sents his  opponent  as  speaking  directly,  but  to  be  effective,  the 
words  assigned  to  the  opponent  must  correspond  with  his 
probable  thoughts.  Isaeus,  who  has  the  dramatic  element  much 
more  strongly  developed  than  Lysias,  furnishes  an  excellent 
example  of  direct  quotation  in  8,  24. 

He  also  reproduces  the  speech  of  persons  other  than  the 
opponent  in  2,  n,  12;  6,  53. 

Such  reproduction  brings  out  more  clearly  the  motives  of 
those  who  are  represented  as  speaking,  and  lends  great  fresh- 
ness and  vivacity  to  the  discourse.  It  was  probably  borrowed 
from  the  speech  of  the  people,  who  are  fond  of  dwelling  on 
particulars  and  details.  Hence  Andocides,  the  natural  orator, 
delights  in  the  figure  while  Isocrates  in  his  court  speeches  does 
not  indulge  in  it.  Pseudo-Demosthenes,  like  Andocides, 
abounds  in  quotations  and  direct  speech,  but  the  real  Demos- 

1  Prof.  Gildersleeve's  lectures. 

2  For  oaths  with  wpdf,  see  Rehdantz,  p.  133. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes    35 

thenes  only  makes  use  of  these  expedients  when  they  are 
specially  suited  to  his  purposes.  There  is  direct  quotation  of 
the  complaint  and  testimony  in  29,  31,  and  a  repetition  of  exact 
words,  ib.,  51.  In  §40  there  is  a  lively  representation  of  a 
supposed  case.1 

Apostrophe. — This  is  defined  by  Tiberius,  III,  61,  as  taking 
place  when  the  speaker  turns  from  the  judges  to  the  opponent. 
Cf.  Phoeb.,  Ill,  49.  Apostrophe  adds  ropyorys  and  ffpodporys 
to  the  discourse,2  by  which  a  lively  personal  element  is  in- 
troduced. In  the  Palamedes  of  Gorgias,  apostrophe  is  in- 
troduced at  considerable  length.  Isocrates  abstains  from  the 
figure  according  to  Hermogenes,  but  it  frequently  occurs  in 
Lysias. 

As  might  be  expected,  apostrophe  is  very  forcibly  used  by 
Isaeus  and  Demosthenes :  Isaeus,  3,  40,  45,  46,  48,  49,  69,  70, 
71;  5,  43,  45,  46,  47;  6,  25,  53;  9,  23;  n,  4,  5 :  Demos.,  28, 
7-10 ;  29,  34,  41,  42;  31,  6-8,  12-14. 

Irony. — Defined  by  Alexander,  III,  22:  Myos  KpoffKowu- 
fjievos  TO  ivavriov  Uf£w.  Cf.  Anon.,  Ill,  140.  Irony  takes 
place  when  more  is  meant  than  meets  the  ear.  When  steeped 
in  bitterness,  it  is  sarcasm.  It  is  used  by  the  practical  orator, 
when  he  wishes  to  overwhelm  his  opponent  with  mockery  and 
scorn.  In  the  hands  of  a  ready  advocate,  irony  becomes  a 
most  powerful  weapon.  Such  a  figure  could  not  have  been 
employed  by  a  formal  and  stately  orator.  There  is  no  well- 
defined  example  in  Antiphon  and  Isocrates.  But  Isaeus  em- 
ploys almost  every  shade  of  the  figure  from  an  ironical  tone 
to  biting  and  bitter  sarcasm.  The  following  are  instances 
of  the  latter  kind  chiefly:  i,  12 ;  2,  20,  21,  23,  24,  33,  35,  37;  3, 

8,  10,  n,  13,  24,  27,  31,  32,  37,  39,  66,  73;  4,  7,  28;  5,  10,  n, 
22,  23,  25,  34,  36,  38,  39,  44,  47;  6,  13,  14;  7,  23;  8,  3,  27,  44; 

9,  22,  26;  ii,  4,  6,  20.     The  figure  is  much  more  frequent  in 
the  second,  third,  and  fifth  speeches.     Demosthenes  does  not 
use  irony  in  these  early  speeches  to  the  same  extent  as  Isaeus, 
and  he  is  not  so  forcible  and  cutting:  cf.  27,  22,  56;  28,  6; 
29,  48;  30,  2;  31,  ii.    In  later  years  Demosthenes  became  the 
great  master  of  irony  and  sarcasm. 

1  Cf.  Blass,  Demos.,  210.  *  Hermog.,  II,  334. 


36    Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes 

SUMMARY. 
I. 

Figures  of  Language. 

The  two  orators  agree  in  the  use  of  anastrophe,  anaphora, 
antistrophe,  polysyndeton,  paronomasia,  parechesis.  As  re- 
gards anadiplosis,  Demosthenes  is  considerably  ahead  of  Isaeus, 
and  nearer  to  his  own  later  standard.  But  Isaeus  far  surpasses 
Demosthenes  in  all  the  more  lively  and  passionate  forms  of 
asyndeton,  with  the  notable  exception  of  the  epilogues  in  the 
twenty-eighth  and  twenty-ninth  speeches.  In  homoioteleuton 
and  parison,  the  influence  of  Isocrates  is  much  greater  than  that 
of  Isaeus.  In  conciseness  and  sharpness  of  antithesis,  Demos- 
thenes is  inferior  to  Isaeus. 

II. 
Figures  of  Thought. 

The  use  of  prodiorthosis  and  apostrophe  is  the  same  in 
both  orators.  In  the  use  of  prolepsis,  diaporesis,  anakoinosis, 
oaths,  paraleipsis,  direct  quotation,  irony,  Isaeus  is  much  more 
varied,  but  enough  of  these  figures  occur  in  Demosthenes  to 
show  the  influence  of  Isaeus.  Perhaps  the  most  marked  in- 
stance of  the  imitation  of  Isaeus  by  Demosthenes  is  to  be  found 
in  the  use  of  the  self-question,  and  in  the  addition  of  a  positive 
or  affirmative  answer  to  the  rhetorical  question. 

The  result  of  this  investigation  shows  that  Demosthenes  was 
influenced  by  Isaeus  in  the  more  passionate  figures  of  language 
and  all  the  figures  of  thought. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

1.  Professor  B.  L.  Gildersleeve.    Works  and  Lectures. 

2.  Dionysius  Halicarnassensis.     Tom.  V.    Lipsiae,  Holtze,  1883. 

3.  Blass.  Die  Attische  Beredsamkeit,  Vols.  I-III,  1874-1887. 

4.  Jebb.    The  Attic  Orators  from  Antiphon  to  Isaeus.    2  Vols.     Lon- 

don, 1876. 

5.  Volkmann,    R.    Die    Rhetorik    der    Griechen    und    Romer.    Ed.    2. 

Leip.,  1885. 

6.  Spengel.    Rhetores  Graeci.    Vol.  I-III.    Lipsiae,  1853-56. 


Isaeus  and  the  Guardianship-Speeches  of  Demosthenes    37 

7.  Rehdantz-Blass    Indices.     (Demosthenes'   Neun    Philippische   Reden 

von  C.  Rehdantz.    Leipzig,  1886. 

8.  Walz,  C.    Rhetores  Graeci.    9  vols.     Stuttgart,  etc.,  1832-6. 

PRINCIPAL  DISSERTATIONS  CONSULTED. 

1.  Hoffmann.     De  Demosthene,  Isaei  Discipulo.     Berlin,  1872. 

2.  Lincke.     De  Elocutione  Isaei.    Lipsiae,  1884. 

3.  Herforth.     Uber  die  Nachahmungen  des  Isaischen  und  Isokratischen 

Stils  bie  Demosthenes.     Griinberg,  1880. 

4.  Laudahn.     Welchen    Einflus    hat    Isaeus    auf    die    demosthenischen 

Vormundschaftsreden  ausgeiibt?    Hildesheim,  1872. 


THf 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 

/roRN\! 


VITA. 

I  entered  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  in  the  fall  of  1878, 
and  in  the  following1  spring"  was  awarded  a  university  scholar- 
ship. I  received  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of  Arts  in  June,  1881. 
After  graduating  in  the  law  department  of  the  University  of 
Maryland  in  1883,  I  was  admitted  to  the  Baltimore  Bar.  I 
re-entered  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  in  1887,  and  was 
University  Scholar  in  Sanskrit,  iSSg-'go,  and  fellow  in  Greek 
and  Sanskrit,  i8go-'92.  Greek,  Sanskrit,  and  Latin  have  been 
my  principal  studies,  and  I  am  under  a  lasting  debt  of  grati- 
tude to  Professors  Gildersleeve,  Bloomfield,  and  Warren  for 
their  constant  encouragement  and  guidance  during  my  entire 
course. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 
LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


sub, 


DAVIS 

INTERLIBRARY  LO 

^N 

BEC.ia    JUL  I1 

'75 

LD  21A-50m-9,'58 
(6889slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


YC  00428 


155338 


F  VI 

il 


